Country: France

Erasme Living Lab – Lyon Metropole: 20 years of Public Innovations

Created in 1999 as a multimedia centre in the countryside one hour west of the metropolitan area of Lyon (Rhône-Alpes Region), Erasme Living Lab became the Living Lab of Greater Lyon Metropole (the political institution that drives the urban area) in 2015, when Rhône department and Lyon Metropole merged. The management team were relocated in the centre of Lyon, the greater city of the region (1,3 millions inhabitants). Dedicated to digital culture since 1999, the ERASME missions were enlarged to smart city and the co-creation of new digital public services for inhabitants. Since 20 years, the Living Lab experimented different methods of open innovation with users on the one side and technological experts in various fields on the other. So, the Erasme team is specialized in collaborative workshops, service design, prototyping and digital technologies. Erasme is a tool for internal services of Lyon Metropole to rethink public services but the Living Lab has also a good reputation with diverse professional communities of the regional ecosystem and even at a national scale.

Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

The transfer of the Living Lab from the countryside toward a metropole led to a new organization and the definition of 3 beneficiary targets. Erasme’s service offering is divided into three levels:
  • The first level concerns all digital projects carried by Lyon Metropole, with the Directorate of digital innovation and computer systems. Beneficiaries are the inhabitants that may be interested by a multiservice card or a better life in a smart city, for example.
  • The second level concerns diverse internal departments of Lyon Metropole for improving public services about child health, culture, transports, Public Service Houses, and so on.
  • The third level concerns the offer for external partners. It may be a municipality that seeks methodological support in the framework of a European programme. Or it may be private companies working for urban services, for example.

    • Co-creation process

    Since 1999, policy makers have imagined the Living Lab as a public service with a dedicated place and a team of experts in digital technologies at the service of local development. In this first stage (1999-2015), Erasme was used to work with museums (Muséolab programme) or teachers (ICT in education). When Erasme delocalized towards Lyon, in 2015, the Living Lab was at a mature stage with a strong experience. Since then, exhibitions are organized “outside the Lab” to mobilize inhabitants around some themes of public interest such as: culture, education, elder or poor people, smart city (urban regeneration, collective transport…). More than a Living Lab that mobilizes users to imagine new concepts or prototypes, Erasme claims to be a “Do Tank” to innovate and change urban life with digital technologies. The co-creation process is divided into two stages: the “Mix” and the “Lab”. This methodology has emerged from the long-term experience of the Living Lab since 1999.
  • The “Mix” is an event in which a specific place (museum, station, church, etc.) is “invested massively” by users for 2 or 3 days. It is a time to produce ideas and first prototypes but also a way for transforming organizations thanks to agile methods, collective intelligence and by creating contributive communities.
  • The “Lab” is a time for creating an innovative product or a digital service. Innovation requires a few weeks and sometimes several months for transforming prototypes into operational tools and services. Professional skills from diverse ecosystems are associated in neutral contexts and tests are realized in real life with end-users.

    • Digital Transformation Process

    Erasme Living Lab claims to be a “Use Laboratory” for the people and not a Lab dedicated to test digital technologies for new markets. Digital tools (software, device) are designed, prototyped, tested then developed in new technological device but to improve life of inhabitants in different public fields: culture, education, health, elderly, mobility and Smart City. The Living Lab mobilizes experts in culture and education but also in digital technologies, a mix of skills that creates a special alchemy to invent the museum of the future (Muséolab, Museomix, digital arts), digital workspaces for pupils, digital tools for aged people to keep in touch with their family, for example. The aim is to solve problems of inhabitants thanks to digital solutions but with a focus on public services, even if some innovations are developed with Start-ups or even with big firms of the region. More recently, Erasme Living Lab is working on the “SelfData project”, which makes it possible to invent services from citizens’ data while ensuring the security of the personal data beyond the requirements of the GDPR. Moreover, the “Grand Lyon Smart Data platform” (www.smartdata.grandlyon.com) makes it possible to co-create new urban services with users and private stakeholders. Lyon Metropole is also associated with the cities of Nantes and La Rochelle, in the west of France, to experiment the “Territorial SelfData”, a project launched with a national think tank called FING (New Generation Internet Federation) which is a leader in exploring the future of Internet and digital transition for people.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    Co-creation workshops deal with four themes of public interest, which produced some services or products.
  • Culture (since 20 years): recent digital technologies were tested such as RFID, e-paper, Ubicomputing, Tangible interfaces, with the help of digital artists, in particular for a science and society museum (Musée des Confluences at Lyon).
  • Education (since 20 years): ICT education then e-learning environment for primary and secondary schools. The ENT (digital work environment) is open to teachers, pupils and their parents. Enriched year after year, it became a digital platform (laclasse.com).
  • Seniors e-care (since 2005): A tool (Webnapperon) was prototyped and tested with the elderly in retirement homes for dependent people. Improved in 2011 in the framework of a European project to co-design with 15 users, a service called “Host-communication” was implemented with open source software to create a social network between the elderly, often alone and far from their family.
  • Services for people in social difficulty have been a new field of experimentation for Erasme since 2015: The aim was to rethink the “Public Service Houses” of the Metropole in particular to welcome foreigners who do not speak French and do not know their social rights.
  • Smart city is also a recent field of experimentation: All citizens are end-users that can test new products or services, such as mobility with public transports.

    • Challenges & Bottlenecks

    Challenges originated in the creation of Erasme Living Lab by political decision: in 1999, a Senator interested in ICT and Internet decided to create a place to foster digital tools in cultural and educational fields, in particular in the countryside (his electoral constituency), where innovations are scarce. The transfer of Erasme towards Lyon in 2015 was also a political decision, to invent a smarter urban life but also to create a new administration with common goals after the merge of Lyon Metropole and the Rhône Department whose missions were different. Bottlenecks are diverse. First of all, the Living Lab is a “service of missions” which has to find budget for/thanks to new projects each year. The budget instability is a problem to follow more and more projects with a small team of managers. Young researchers or experts are sometimes recruited with a fixed-term contract thanks to the ERDF funds or other national or regional project funds but skills and competencies disappeared at the end of the contract. The lack of budget and its instability are also a problem to create a dedicated place for the Living Lab. Even if mobile workshops in the city are a good solution to attract citizens to the experimentations, a dedicated place is necessary for the development and innovation stage when professionals from diverse ecosystems have to meet and share their competencies.

    Transferability & Replicability

    Diffusion of innovations is important for Erasme. For example, prototypes of the Muséolab were diffused in museums, even at an international scale. The table Museo Touch is commercialized by a private firm. In education, the digital platform laclasse.com is used by more and more educative institutions in France. As Erasme is the oldest Living Lab in France, the question of replicability is very important for the management team. As Erasme belongs to different networks, at a local, national or even European scale, the co-creation model called “the Mix” was experimented elsewhere. Moreover, the reputation of the Erasme team generates solicitations from other geographical areas, even from around the world for the ”Museum of the Future”. Internationally, Erasme is registered in networks such as the Arts Sciences Network, Enoll (in 2010) or EUROCITIES (from 2017). Nevertheless, as Erasme claims a value creation in the service of general interest, transferability of the co-creative approach (Mix, Lab) is not easy with economic ecosystems in the region. But the theme of Smart City opens the partnership to businesses even if big firms are not used to open innovation, open source or Creative Commons License. Once they agreed with these principles, big firms use Erasme as a training centre to co-creation methods for their own employees. Barriers to co-creation are step by step transformed in a way to diffuse co-creation methods in the economic ecosystem of Lyon urban region. The future creation of an “Augmented Third-Place for Urban Worlds” (Smart City, Smart Territory) by a collaboration with another Living Lab in Lyon (TUBÀ), the university and other institutions, is the result of the Erasme reputation acquired step by step since 20 years.

    Success Factors

    The success of Erasme Living Lab depends on diverse factors.
    • The management team is composed of engineers, designers, developers, makers who are familiar with open innovation methods, animation and project management. They share competencies with diverse creative and professional communities, all experts in a specific field (culture, education, technology, health…) at a local, regional or even national and international scales.
    • Established step by step during 20 years, the methodology of co-creation with users and stakeholders is proven: a first phase of “Mix” with users (from ideation to prototypes); a second phase of “Lab” with professionals and users (from prototypes to tests then development of an innovative product or service).
    • Education to the “right to fail” through a communication about “lessons from experience”. Because failures can be a source of value rather than a barrier to co-creation.
    • A Living Lab approach “out of the walls”, in public spaces with citizens rather than in a dedicated place, is a way to promote co-creation to the general public, digital artists or social innovators. But a dedicated place “as neutral as possible” is better for associating professional ecosystems such as big firms, creative start-ups or higher education institutions (design, digital coding, urban planning…).
    • Thanks to its 20 years of seniority, Erasme Living Lab is well identified by the metropolitan ecosystem, and even beyond the region.

    Lessons learned

    For the managers of Erasme, many Living Labs look more like Think Tanks. Erasme claims to be a “Do Tank” because the management team has the will to “make” without being so far a Fab Lab. Erasme is actually relying on existing Fab Labs to make some prototypes. End-users are invited to the co-creation process but at specific moments: 1) upstream in the ideation phase (one or two days) and the rapid prototyping phase (10 days); 2) downstream to test the prototypes. Between these two stages, time (several weeks even months) is given to private and public stakeholders for the development phase (further prototyping, tests, returns and iterations) of innovations that can be put on the market (diffusion phase). To be efficient during theses different stages, the Living Lab need a management team for maintaining a clear purpose (production of solutions and not only concepts and prototypes) and for offering a methodological accompaniment to users and stakeholders. But the respect of freedom in a “neutral” space or place is necessary in order to foster creativity, the emergence of disruptive ideas, and agility necessary for prototyping out of usual operating constraints. Paid professionals are a necessity to mobilize experts in the development phase, to be able to cross technical competences with artistic skills in dedicated domains (education, culture, health, smart city…). But the number of professionals have to be limited to maintain proximity among the stakeholders when it is necessary to obtain a consensus about the final product.

    SIILAB – Hauts-De-France Region: A «Public Innovation Lab» for Digital and Social Inclusion

    The SIILAB (Social Innovation and Investment Laboratory) is a «Public Innovation Lab» created in 2016 in the framework of a national call for project to foster the «Digital Transition of the State and Modernization of Public Action». The SIILAB was one of the twelve projects labelled as Public Innovation Labs in different regions. The raison d’être of the SIILAB is the digital inclusion in a region where a lot of people are poor or low qualified or unemployed or in scholar exclusion. Furthermore, digital exclusion (no digital device or illectronism) concerns 1,2 million people in the Hauts-de-France region (and 13 million in France). In the context of e-government and increasing e-administration, access to digital public services is a priority for public actors and social mediation actors. The SIILAB is an innovative answer to this political challenge. Even if 16 stakeholders were at the origin of this social innovation project, the DRJSCS (Regional Directorate of Youth, Sports and Social Cohesion) of the Hauts-de-France region (North of France) is the pilot of the Living Lab. As a resource centre for social innovators, the SIILAB is located in the antenna of the DRJSCS, in Lille. It is also considered as a “neutral meeting point” (a room with tools for design sessions) for stakeholders. As a methodology, the Living Lab is “a space and time of liberty” to experiment new practices in administrations. Above all, the SIILAB is a framework for actors of the social economy as well as public agents from the State or the local authorities to launch projects at the scale of the Hauts-de-France region. To improve social innovations and social economy, the work program of the SIILAB focuses on 7 axes : crowd-sourcing, simpler administrative procedures, illectronism, open data, e-learning, assessment, promotion of social innovations to grand public.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The SIILAB was created by the DRJSCS and 15 other founders, from the social economy (association networks, social entrepreneurs networks, R&D institute for transfer of social innovations, a regional research and training chair), decentralised directorates from State services (social security, employment, housing, family allowances, environment, energy, social economy, statistics) and national public financial institutions. The Regional Directorate of Youth, Sports and Social Cohesion is the node of a larger network of public and private stakeholders that were used to work together but wished to improve their collaborative practices to create new solutions for digital and social inclusion. Beneficiaries are citizens that need social aids or at least inhabitants far from digital transformation of public services.

    Co-creation process

    The SIILAB charter sets out methods in order to «foster the emergence of territorial innovations (and) the evaluation of the impact of social innovations». The methodology follows 3 phases: 1) Co-design of public policies with users for their real needs ; 2) Prototyping and test of solutions; 3) Project development with agile methods. Specific tools inspired from design methodologies are used, such as «Lego games» as Icebreaker between people who come from diverse institutions with different professional mindsets. Other tools and co-creative methods are powered by the DITP (a governmental service for the transformation of administrations). A small team of managers and limited-term employees are in charge of co-creative workshops in a dedicated room equipped with mobile tables, large screens and software often forbidden in the French administration. The SIILAB team is beta-tester for these software, creates fact sheets for users and diffuses innovations on social medias. The SIILAB is a space which favours interactions between administrations and their stakeholders, that allows the “right to fail” and a collaborative work based on agility and a non-hierarchical organisation. Even if the stakeholders are first interested by the SIILAB to experiment new digital tools rather than creative methodologies, the Living Lab helps stakeholders to change their work habits to foster innovative projects.

    Digital Transformation Process

    The role of the SIILAB in the digital transformation is twofold: 1) exploring impacts of the administrative dematerialization on public agents and in particular on social workers in the region; 2) finding solutions for the digital inclusion of inhabitants whatever their social level and the territory where they live. Indeed, the national program Action 2022 aims at 100% administrative dematerialization in 2022 and at reducing the number of public officials: Internet has to become the main access to public services. But what will be the consequences in a region with a lot of inequalities? The SIILAB is a Living Lab for helping public agents with new digital practices, not only in the dematerialization of administrative requests but also to co-create new procedures beyond paper forms removal. Collaborative workshops were organised on the themes of end-users (digital vulnerability, reception in social centres), digital training of social workers or about authorised software (licences, security, hacking). To reduce the negative impacts of digital exclusion on fragile populations, the SIILAB designed and prototyped an interactive map of all social centres or other institutions than can help beneficiaries in their digital administrative requests. According to a Living Lab approach, a first inventory of local initiatives to improve the digital accessibility to public services was realised, by students of the university. A prototype of the map was invented in co-creative sessions, then tested on an “interactive table” in the SIILAB at Lille during the national «Week for Public Innovation» (2018). Accessible on the web, the interactive map constitutes a new public service against illectronism. An incremental updating of the map (800 places in 2018, 1500 places in June 2019) and user-returns about quality and accessibility are also a type of “evaluation in progress” of this new digital public service.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    The SIILAB is a tool for administrations to experiment new digital tools and work practices without the logic of signature books and with less political control than usual. As a public innovation Lab, the Lab managers are authorised to test disruptive rules for public procurement, such as the purchase of small equipment on the Amazon website or the use of a credit card. Thanks to the Living Lab, public agents can test online meetings or the national digital platform called “demarches-simplifiees.fr” (simplified processes) that helps public officials to co-product e-administration. As a Lab dedicated to social economy, social innovation and public innovation, the SIILAB is used by more than 150 public or private actors in the region. For transforming the SIILAB into “a network of networks”, the aim is to enlarge the audience of the Living Lab thanks to a mailing list of 1600 addresses (in 2019) of associations, local communities, State administrations, or through more than 1000 followers on Twitter. This social network is also used by the Lab managers to bypass the usual hierarchical communication with the ministries and elected people. Examples of outcomes are: a digital kit to train social workers in digital inclusion practices (access to social rights with Internet); a video prototype to explain «domiciliation in Social Centres»; an interactive map of places for digital inclusion not far from home (training, help of social workers to guide users in e-administration). The map has three aims: 1) helping inhabitants in their digital requests; 2) showing inequalities between citizens according to the territories where they live; 3) encouraging public authorities for improving the geographical diffusion of resource centres for e-administration.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    The SIILAB is a Public Innovation Lab managed by a State institution, the DRJSCS, under the authority of the Préfet (representative of the State authority in the regions). Even if a national call for project is a lever for public innovations, the change in administrative routines and the hierarchical top-down decisional process are real challenges. Another challenge linked to the call for project as a tool for public innovation is the short-term funding, too short to co-create with users and to prototype innovations. So, there is a gap between political discourses about co-creation and Living Labs (that need funds) and the national incentive for reducing public expenditure. According to the SIILAB experiments, a second bottleneck in transforming administrations is the digital process in itself. Cost, skills and data security can be barriers for the use of software in co-creative sessions with any public agent engaged in the digital transformation. And co-creation is not a priority when the digital transformation in public services implies more work to implement new software, new design and new rules (once only, easy to read and understand, etc.). Another barrier to the efficiency of Public Innovations Labs is that projects are based on partnership, too often based on engaged people but who could leave the experiment following changes in their careers.

    Transferability & Replicability

    The diffusion of the SIILAB experimentations is made by online social networks or through events “in the real world”, in the region or in France. From 2016, the SIILAB projected the scaling up of innovations at the regional scale, at the trans-border scale with Belgium and at a national scale through social economy networks. At a regional scale, the mapping of digital resource centres is a way of replicability in more and more local communities. At a national scale, other public innovations labs or social innovators come to visit the SIILAB in Lille in order to transfer some experiments. But considering the short time funding of the Living Lab, the uncertain future of the SIILAB makes it difficult to imagine the diffusion phase. Moreover, as a public innovation Lab created for the Hauts-de-France region, the SIILAB has no administrative authority to diffuse new public actions in other regions in France. These regions could just try to imitate the SIILAB, but probably in the limited framework of a call of project. A way to get around this obstacle was the participation of the SIILAB to the creation of a «Connected France Hub», a regional hub of public and private actors for digital inclusion (national call for projects from the “Bank of the Territories”). Linked to the national incentive for creating Living Labs in the public services, replicability of Public Innovation Labs as tools for administrative transformation goes also through a MOOC developed with the Sorbonne University in Paris to explain how to create a Public Innovation Lab.

    Success Factors

    For the government that launched projects for transformation of public action, the criteria of success are: cost-savings in public expenditure, a better quality of public services for users, a better work environment for public agents, an innovative digital project, the quality of governance. For the SIILAB, additional success factors are: an increased organisational performance, the learning of collaborative practices, a better implementation of public policies, new services for vulnerable people (poor, elderly, undergraduate, immigrants…). Moreover, SIILAB managers consider as a success the visibility of the social innovations by the Préfet (representative of the State in the regions) and by the government in Paris. Success criteria of the SIILAB were measured in 2019: more than 150 stakeholders; more than 3050 persons participated in 310 workshops or events (more than 200 participants in November 2018); 50 projects launched; 1600 persons in the mailing list; more than 1000 followers on Twitter and around 25 000 views per month; national prices as indicators of recognition and efficiency (Télécoms Innovation 2018, Best innovative strategy 2018). But a success factor to achieve these success criteria was the SIILAB capacity to reinforce the previous habits of decentralised State services to work together, as well as with the public and private actors of the social economy, including associations, universities and local authorities.

    Lessons learned

    The role of the SIILAB, as a Public Innovation Lab supported by the French Government, is to experiment digital tools and co-creative methods, often inspired from service design. Public Innovation Labs are elements of a national policy that aims to restore the legitimacy of public action by responding to three objectives: a social issue (linked to digital change), a budgetary issue (cost-savings), a governance issue (Public, Private, People Partnership). The specificity of the SIILAB is focused on social innovation and digital inclusion in a region where a lot of vulnerable people are far from e-administration. Its governance (a committee for strategic decisions, a self-organised partnership for actions, a regional networking) is one model among others in Public Innovation Labs. Introducing the Living Lab methodologies in a bureaucratic organisation allows the “right to fail” and new relations between State administrations, local public agents and private stakeholders (no subsidies but funds for a collective project). But some bottlenecks appeared through the SIILAB or other Public Innovation Labs: 1) co-creation with intermediate-users (public agents, associations) and not final vulnerable users; 2) when an innovative practice becomes a norm, it is more difficult to quantify how it changes public action; 3) it is difficult to evaluate the costs avoided by co-creation; 4) a short-term funding (2 or 3 years) does not allow to test innovations and change practices; 5) the Anglo-saxon model of «impact measurement» does not allow to evaluate the collective value creation (Commons).

    L.I.V.E. – A Living Lab created by 3 cities to Co-Create Digital Urban Services with Citizens

    L.I.V.E. is the acronym for “Lab pour Imaginer la Ville Ensemble” (Lab to Imagine the City Together). The Living Lab approach is a methodology to co-design “user-friendly digital (public) services” with inhabitants and to imagine the “Smart and inclusive City”. L.I.V.E. was a political initiative of the mayors of 3 medium-sized cities in the Lille Metropolitan Area (North of France), composed of 95 municipalities with independent administrations, except some common services supported by the Lille European Metropole (MEL) administration. From a geopolitical point of view, L.I.V.E. was an innovative project that encouraged public officials of three municipalities to share their practices and to create digital urban services for and with citizens. Doing so, L.I.V.E. was a political innovation because municipalities are not used to share experiences with other municipalities. It was also a social innovation because the social profile of citizens in the three cities is very different: Marcq-en-Baroeul (a upper-class city with business and financial services) “against” – politically speaking – two declining industrial cities, Tourcoing and Roubaix (a working-class city with a high proportion of foreign-born population and high unemployment rate). So a Living Lab approach was chosen to go beyond the traditional political, administrative and social divide between the three contiguous cities. The project was launched and tested in 2017 then operationalized in 2018-2019, supported by the MEL within the framework of ERDF funds. But in the end of 2019, L.I.V.E was still a «work in progress».

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The key stakeholders included policymakers and public agents from the three municipalities as well as agents of the Lille European Metropole (MEL) to check the coordination between the policies and the scales of service implementation. Private stakeholders were associated according to the themes of the workshops (real estate companies, car parks managers, craftsmen, local shops,…). Local service designers or digital startups were associated to the Living Lab to help public agents and citizens during the design sessions or the prototyping of new digital services. They participated to the knowledge transfer and to co-creation practices for digital transformation. Beneficiaries were twofold: citizens and public agents. L.I.V.E. addressed citizens in order to invent new digital services that were solutions for “real needs” in the city (local e-commerce, car parks, digital application for leisure, co-working spaces, connected urban furniture…). But the Living Lab addressed public agents too for them to better understand the “real needs of citizens”, to share new knowledge and competencies about open data and social media and to create new public policies in the three cities.

    Co-creation process

    The co-creation process was divided into two stages: an experimental phase in 2017 and a structuration phase in 2018 and 2019. During the experimental phase, inhabitants were invited to discuss about their needs: 30 to 70 inhabitants per workshop “played the game” to imagine what types of digital tools could be created through a Living Lab to “imagine a better city together”. During the structuration phase, there were less inhabitants per workshop and sometimes only public agents and stakeholders according to the themes of the sessions, even if incentives to participation was diffused through websites and social networks. Co-creation process was considered by public managers and stakeholders as a “pleasant way of working” to solve problems by an innovative methodology. There were no dedicated place for the Living Lab but workshops were alternatively organised in one of the local community in respect of a “political equilibrium”. Agents of each collectivity were invited to share their different competencies with the help of designers specialised in design thinking or service design. Some startups were invited to prototype some digital solutions according to the ideas of inhabitants and stakeholders, and only some of these solutions were tested with inhabitants.

    Digital Transformation Process

    The digital transformation process concerned two types of users. On the one hand, citizens were the main target of the Living Lab project: L.I.V.E was a method to imagine a “better life” in the city thanks to new digital services, not created by American firms (GAFAM) or by Parisian Startups but co-created with citizens and local Startups to meet what they called “real needs” of citizens. On the other, public agents of the three implied cities were the secondary target: in place of digital services imagined by IT public services in a Top Down approach, the L.I.V.E. project was a methodology to help public agents to better understand the “real needs” of citizens or public agents following a bottom up approach. It was also a methodology to transform IT public departments of the municipalities, that have no skills about open data, social media or API tools.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    As the experience lasted less than three years, it was too short to obtain significant results in term of new digital public services or even private digital tools for inhabitants. The main outcomes could be political as three mayors accepted to work with citizens and allowed their public agents for sharing time and local data. COVID-19 was a barrier to finalise some projects during the consolidation phase of the program. Value creation was less in the domain of public cost savings, neither in the creation of new digital public services than in a change of mindset and the discovery of service design and design thinking with inhabitants and stakeholders.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    A first challenge was the participation of inhabitants. If they were mobilised during the experimental phase, in 2017, to discuss about their needs, it was more difficult in the structuration phase of the Living Lab (2018-2019): citizens had not always time to participate to all the co-creative workshops, in particular if they were organised in the afternoon. A second challenge was institutional even if elected people were at the origin of the Living Lab project. Each local community constitutes the territorial and administrative framework for public services to inhabitants. So co-creation of new public services could face to administrative or legal barriers. Organising workshops from place to place without any dedicated building to the Living Lab was a way to mobilise inhabitants but was finally a barrier for mixing the population of the three cities. If, on the contrary, geographical mobility was not a problem for public agents and stakeholders, some public managers consider that a dedicated place for the Living Lab could be a “symbol of the political will” to work together and could be a lever for attracting potential (private) investors. Bottlenecks are linked to administrative traditions. Design workshops are important to identify real needs, to imagine new scenarios, to test prototypes and to identify irritants with inhabitants. But public managers consider that it is difficult: 1) to make “quick and dirty” with public procurement; 2) to «co-manage» new services with users. If validation of new policies is the role of elected people, production of digital services is the role of IT service Directorates of the local collectivities. Usual routines of service production and delivery are the main attribute of IT Directorates: if they agree with the role of users in the co-design phase, they are not ready for co-production and co-delivery with inhabitants.

    Transferability & Replicability

    The L.I.V.E. project is not at a stage of transferability. The scale of replicability could be the transferability of design processes from a public service to another public service in the framework of the three municipalities. Nevertheless, the aim was to diffuse to “other cities” new practices experimented through the Living Lab, because the project was co-financed by European funds and had to promote the results at a larger scale. But the end of the financial support and because of COVID-19, experimentations were stopped: the last news on Facebook or Twitter was posted in June 2020. Impossible to find any other information about “L.I.V.E” or “www.imaginezlaville.live/” on the Net in 2021. Transferability and replicability seem so to be largely compromised. Nevertheless, the Living Lab approach is still applied through a place dedicated to public service design in the building of the MEL. In 2020, Lille Metropole was also the World Capital of Design to improve public policies through a Living Lab approach at the scale of 90 local communities and more than 1.2 millions inhabitants, when L.I.V.E. project concerned 3 local collectivities and 250.000 inhabitants.

    Success Factors

    For local public managers, a criteria of success would be better public services thanks to Open data. L.I.V.E was an opportunity to test in real life with inhabitants some solutions and tools usually developed by Startups. Local collectivities can use data of their internal professional services in order to create new piloting tools before a larger openness of public data. For local authorities, data can lead to a revolution in public services and “doing together” with inhabitants and stakeholders “makes sense because nobody knows everything”.

    Lessons learned

    L.I.V.E. was imagined in the context of the digital transformation of public policies and local administrations. How to improve the relationship between citizens, elected people and public agents? How to switch from existing ICT tools (websites of municipalities) to online public services? The originality of the L.I.V.E. project is that workshops were organised in 2017 with the inhabitants to define the themes to explore and invent “the City of Tomorrow together”. The Living Lab workshops in 2018-2019 were planned to work on the priorities previously defined by citizens in 2017: family recreation, car parking, co-working, local trade, data for local collectivities, connected urban furniture, nature in the city, digital at school. Even if the project lasted for only three years, conditioned by the funding, the important outcome is not new digital services (still at a stage of “work in progress”) but the change of cultural mindset for public agents and inhabitants. Nevertheless, elected representatives have to take final decisions for public policies but co-creation of services through Living Lab methodology is difficult to integrate in a traditional political process. So, for transforming public services and public policies through co-creation with citizens and users, it is often “necessary to go under the radars”, working in small groups to encourage co-design. Then administrative managers have to list the priority projects to be proposed for a political validation.

    The Saillysienne Fabrique: the Participatory Garden

    The “saillysienne Fabrique” (“La fabrique saillysienne”) was created at the beginning of 2017 aiming to set up projects proposed by the inhabitants, in order to improve the quality of life of the village. These cooperative projects have a general interest objective, and mainly have an environmental purpose. The objective of the fabrique is thus to modify the traditional methods of communication between elected officials and citizens.

    While the choice of projects was left completely open, the majority of the projects focused on themes combining cooperation and preservation of the environment. The Saillysienne Fabrique was launched in Sailly-Lez-Lannoy, a village situated in the department of Nord (Hauts-de-France), which had 1696 inhabitants in 2015.

    Currently, 11 projects have been selected. The projects are mainly environmental. The environmental objective is dominant in the following projects: Compost Workshop, Carpooling, Zero Waste Challenge, Participatory garden, Hives. In the other projects, the “social link” dimension is dominant, but environmental preservation can also be present, in particular through the idea of re-using resources. The other projects are the Book Boxes, Magazine Exchange, European Cycling Challenge, National Meetings of Participation, Film Debate, and Twinning.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The categories of stakeholders of the Fabrique’s network are the following: A majority of Sailly-Lez-Lannoy inhabitants, a few other inhabitants from other villages, municipal councillors, municipal nursery and primary schools, professionals who periodically come to help the Fabrique’s workshops.

    Co-creation process

    The social innovation consists above all in the co-creation process between the inhabitants and the town hall. Citizen participation goes beyond the citizen debate, since citizens are experimenting by themselves the projects that they proposed. The innovation network of the participatory garden is made up of the town hall, citizens of Sailly-Lez-Lannoy, citizens of other neighbouring villages, and the schools of the village. Some professionals (associations, self-employed persons) are also involved in the Fabrique. Some of them have helped the inhabitants on a voluntary basis, others were compensated; some of them participated in several meetings, others intervened on an as-needed basis, according to the requests of the inhabitants.

    Digital Transformation Process

    This case study is not about a digital transformation process. The Saillysienne Fabrique is above all a “social innovation”: The Saillysienne Fabrique is presented by the people of the municipal council as a “means” to “accompany people who want to do something positive for the citizens”.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    The evaluation of the impacts of the Fabrique is difficult, especially since the project started in 2017 and is only at its beginning. However, several positive impacts have been identified. First of all, it has been noted that new inhabitants were attracted into the life of the village. All the inhabitants interviewed said they had met people they did not know, of a great diversity of ages, and whom they could never have met through their usual networks. In the case of the participatory garden, some participants felt that they did not know 80% of the people participating in the garden. In this sense, the town hall’s objective has been achieved. Second, new social links have been created. In the workshops, the creation of social ties is also evident through the exchanges that are established. The councilor noted that participation in the Fabrique is also a way for some people going through difficult times in their lives (health problems, divorce) to create or maintain social ties without having to talk about their personal background. The purpose of the Incredible Edible Community Garden is that the harvest is used by all people, allowing people who have financial problems to help themselves. In the case of the Sailly-Lez-Lannoy participatory garden, sharing the harvest is an objective but rather to make it enjoyable. As most of the inhabitants are wealthy, the garden was not designed with the aim of enabling poor people to find ways to survive. The project has also increased the visibility of the village. Sailly-Lez-Lannoy has been chosen for high-frequency carpooling.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    The interviewees do not identify any unavoidable barriers.  However, they pointed out the reluctance of some elected representatives concerning changes in the working methods, or the acceptance of power sharing. Other obstacles are more traditional, such as financial obstacles and lack of time. Implementing a participatory democracy method changes the working methods of the town hall, especially the decision-making process. The reluctance of some municipal councillors to share the decision-making process appeared at several stages of the project. Another common barrier is the financial constraints. Indeed, one of the environmental objectives is that the inhabitants manage to recover materials, pallets, seeds, from their networks of friends, or from sites of recycling, sharing of materials, in order to avoid buying them on the market and to respect the planet. However, other projects of the Fabrique require more funding, such as the Twinning project, and inhabitants are trying to obtain funding elsewhere. The town hall manages to have an operating budget. In villages with few inhabitants, budgets are dedicated to specific services, consequently, there is little room for manoeuvre to open new budgets, especially during the year. If the lack of time is one of the reasons why the elected representatives set up the Fabrique, the lack of time is also a barrier for the inhabitants. Some inhabitants have to leave the project for professional and family reasons, which could contribute, if they have specialities in the project, to endanger the existence of the workshop.

    Transferability & Replicability

    The municipality has in mind that this social innovation linked to the new form of co-creation of value between the inhabitants, professionals, and the town hall should be reproduced in other villages. The municipal councillor at the origin of the project believes that it is necessary to involve the inhabitants because in small municipalities, the councillors do not have the time to develop such projects. The Fabrique is the solution to allow the development of projects. Thus, several organisations have taken an interest in this Fabrique with the intention of duplicate this mode of collaboration: carpooling on the scale of the urban community of Lille.

    Success Factors

    The film “Tomorrow”, which illustrates local solutions to environmental, economic and social problems around the world, was a good starting point for a discussion on citizen participation. Also, If the mayor of the municipality had not so much agreed on the merits of this project, and had not brought this project to the municipal councillors, the project would not have been implemented. Moreover, the fact that the town hall is the initiator of this network gives credibility to citizen initiatives.   It seems obvious to all the participants in the Fabrique that the municipal councillor who launched the project is essential to the smooth running of the Fabrique. The fact of having an elected representative in the innovation network facilitates certain actions of the projects, because since the projects take place in public spaces. She also managed to obtain a small budget from the municipal budget. Moreover, she boosts the workshops by linking the different projects through the facebook site, by launching a doodle for people to get together, by reserving the wedding hall according to the meeting requirements of the inhabitants, as well as by finding professionals according to the demands of the inhabitants. The personality of the councillor, very dynamic, who unites the teams, who is very attentive, very much in the exchange, allowed the experiences to be quickly set up.   The Fabrique has attracted the interest of other stakeholders. This visibility makes it possible to attract other inhabitants and eventually to obtain other sources of financing.

    Lessons learned

    Elected representatives of small municipalities usually have a job in addition to their mission as elected representatives, and must manage family logistics. The involvement of the inhabitants is the only way to propose a greater number of projects. In addition, some projects are too expensive for the municipality. The size of the village (less than 2000 inhabitants) requires alternative ways to develop projects because the town hall has few human and financial resources. The municipal councillor at the origin of the project considers that today, the only way to develop collective projects in small villages is to co-create them with the inhabitants. Some projects are complex to set up, and elected representatives do not have the knowledge to implement certain projects. The involvement of a European diplomatic inhabitant made it possible to initiate this project. Through his job, this person has the necessary contacts to do so, as well as the competences.   Finally, the trio of experts, inhabitants and elected representatives is win-win-win relationship.

    The Melting Potes Programme

    The Melting Potes programme is a civic service commitment offered by the Unis-cités association, primarily for the Roma community, which has been opened since 2018 also to refugees. The aim of the programme is to facilitate the inclusion of minorities in the French community and to eliminate prejudices against them.

    The programme is innovative in several fields. Civic service is used as a springboard for the integration of discriminated groups into the French community. Civic service enables young allophones to improve their level of French language, to improve knowledge of French culture, and to consider their project for the future. In addition, this programme helps to remove any prejudices about the communities that young people or civic service partners may have. Finally, allophones have a role as community support, to improve the inclusion of their community in the French community. In addition, this social innovation is structured around several methodological and pedagogical innovations (language sessions conducted by Francophones, tailor-made training on access to rights and health).

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The main target of the programme is Roma community. An experiment has been carried out in Paris and Toulouse.

    Co-creation process

    The Melting Potes network gathered numerous partners: – the Unis-cité association, and in particular the Toulouse office (as architect of the project) – the Civic Service Agency is a Public Interest Group under the supervision of the Ministry of National Education. – the Di-Air (Inter-ministerial Delegation for the Reception and Integration of Refugees), which is the structures in charge of refugees in temporary accommodation centre), CHU (University Hospital Centre), CADA (Centre for Asylum Seekers). – the National education, in particular the Academic Centre for the education of newly arrived allophone pupils and children from itinerant families and travellers). The teachers of FLE who are involved in the Unis-cité programme. Schools in which allophone families will register their children. Schools for French as a Foreign Language. -The platform “health-precariousness” of the city of Toulouse, which is a platform gathering all the actors of precariousness (health, housing, professional integration). -The regional and departmental directorate for youth, sports and social cohesion), in charge of managing long-term programmes on territorial level. -Other partners are also part of this innovation network, health professionals, for example school medicine, volunteers of the Médecin du Monde association and associations dedicated to refugees. -Funders: Unis-cité private national funders, the Civic Service Agency, the National Education, local funders (local authorities, etc.).

    Digital Transformation Process

    This case study is not about a digital transformation process, but it’s a social innovation. Social innovation refers to the target of the programme, the search for diversity and cultural mix  and the community support.  

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    It is difficult to measure some of the integration process, but the integration of refugees or Roma through the community support is effective. A snowball effect is noticed from the moment a child of a community is sent to school thanks to the actions of the community support. Even if the impact is difficult to estimate, an increase in social cohesion due to the reduction of prejudices among young people in civic service, the sensitization of young people by the Melting Potes group and the sensitization of the families of young volunteers has been noted.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    The main challenges that the programme faced during its implementation was related first of all to human obstacles. Roma are often confused with Travellers, which gives the image of people who would not want to settle on the territory. In addition, young Roma or some refugees are subjected to discrimination when they want to open a current account to undertake their civic service. Another obstacle relates to differences in equal treatment depending on the territory.  The new law regarding refugees is still very recent, it has emerged that the Civic Service Agency does not give the same answers on the admission of refugees into civic service according to the territorial offices.   Financial barriers are important for the Melting Potes programme, especially in its Roma Melting Potes version. Indeed, large private companies and local authorities are reluctant to put a large amount of money into helping Roma communities, even if they would like to. Companies do not want to associate their image with that of the Roma, and communities are concerned about the return of voters who may blame them for this initiative. There are also logistical challenges. Melting Potes volunteers are forced to undertake missions corresponding to office hours (9am-5pm) and not on Saturday. This temporality limits the missions. Another potential obstacle for the next year group is the recruitment of refugees.

    Transferability & Replicability

    The ambition of the Unis-cité association, hosting this innovation network, is to develop this programme throughout the country. Unis-cité has just obtained a partnership with the DI-Air (Inter-ministerial Delegation for the Reception and Integration of Refugees) to increase the number of refugees welcomed throughout France. This method is now being spread to other associations willing to invest in this type of programme.  

    Success Factors

    Among success factors, a key role has been played by the city of Toulouse and the amendment of the 2010 law. To be more specific, the city of Toulouse has carried out with the Interministerial Delegation for Housing and Access to Housing (DIHAL) an ambitious and intelligent territorial strategy for the reduction of slums. Since 2012, the DIHAL has been monitoring the dismantling of illegal camps in the territories and has provided financial support for partnership initiatives to reduce the number of slums. A total of 329 people (115 of them minors) were rehoused, including 298 in the City’s insertion and accommodation system. The operation was carried out under good conditions and in partnerships with the services of the prefecture, the town hall of Toulouse, the Departmental Directorate of Social Cohesion, the Central Directorate of Public Security, the municipal police and social workers from the Soliha and France Horizon associations, and the French Red Cross. The successful running of these operations and pre-existing partnerships in the territory have helped to facilitate the development of the Melting Potes programme.   Second, the amendment of the Civic Service Act has allowed beneficiaries of international protection, and some other refugees, to access civic service.

    Lessons learned

    The hosting structures were initially difficult to convince, on the one hand because the association did not have any concrete results to present on this programme, and on the other hand because the programme had to be set up over a very short period of time. As a result, the local coordinator began by offering this program to Unis-cités’ historical partners (Emmaüs, Les restos du cœur, la banque alimentaire). When the programme was presented, some associations were reluctant to welcome young people from the Roma community, explaining the difficulties they might have in communicating with this community. Paradoxically, solving these types of communication difficulties is the purpose of the programme. The aim is to resolve the difficulties of understanding which exist between the French community and the Roma community or the families of refugees. From the third year group of Melting Potes, the trend was reversed, i.e. a large number of associations and organisations came forward to ask for Melting Potes civic service volunteers. More generally, this case study revealed the importance in the case of social innovation of disseminating innovation and sharing good practices between associations.

    Booster Programme

    The “Booster programme” is a programme of a civic service innovation network seeking to reintegrate into society young people in situation of school dropout. Offered by the association Unis-cité, it is a 6 to 9-month commitment combining civic service and school reintegration in regular Comprehensive school or vocational school.

    The purpose of this programme is to guide minors to employment or training at the end of their civic service by allowing them to follow a school refresher course. While civic service is not a new concept, applying civic service to young dropouts helps to reverse the image these young people have of themselves: from those who are accompanied and helped, they become the ones who help others, which contributes to their revalorization. This social innovation is based on a particular working method (methodological innovation) combining a 2-days school refresher course and a 3-days collective civic service.

     

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    This programme, targeted at minors aged 16 to 18 who have dropped out of school, was launched in 2012 by the Unis-Cité association. Unis-Cité, which has extensive experience in mobilising young people and various profiles on civic missions, has decided to create a programme that complies with these specifications, in partnership with the Ministry of National Education and the Civic Service Agency. The Booster programme connects the Unis-cité association, the Civic Service Agency (as funder), the national education system (in particular, the MLDS – The mission that prevent school drop-outs under the French National Education System), partner Comprehensive or Vocational schools, national education volunteers, external lecturers. The networks also involves other funders: the national private funders of Unis-cité (e.g. Coca-Cola Foundation, HSBC or the SUEZ Initiative Foundation), the European Social Fund, local funders (for example the regional youth and sports department), local private foundation.

    Co-creation process

    The programme helps the main beneficiaries of the project, young people, to move from those who are accompanied and helped, to the ones who help others, which contributes to their revalorization. The specificity of the civic service association Unis-cité is to offer a team-based civic service, and to focus on diversity within groups. Through the Booster programme, since 2012, school dropouts are being remobilised by a partnership designed by Unis-Cité, the MLDS, and the Civic Service Agency, thanks to an alternating civic service programme combining missions of general interest (provided by the Unis-cité association) carried out with young adults in civic service, and sessions of school upgrading in partner Comprehensive schools (provided by the public partner). In the Booster programme, civic service is also adapted to the type of audience, with concrete solidarity actions. The supervision is more individualized and reinforced.

    Digital Transformation Process

    This case study is not about a digital transformation process, but rather social innovation. It has led to pedagogical and methodological innovations.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    From an economic perspective, dropping out generates significant costs for society, much higher than those corresponding to the action of public policies in this field. The costs associated with the drop-out of a young person, accumulated over time, have been estimated for France at 230,000 euros for each student who has dropped out. The Booster programme helps to reduce this cost. The year of civic service solves a number of problems of young dropouts such as health check, opening a bank account, renew their ID card) in addition to a possible return to training or employment. On the year 2018-2019, Unis-cité welcomed between 7500 and 8000 young volunteers. For the Unis-cité association, each year, the number of school dropouts fluctuates according to the number of territories that develop the Booster programme (20 territories for the 2018-2019 school year; 18 territories in 2017-2018). For 2018-19, the programme includes 400 young people, including 200 minors.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    The programme costs money and cannot be financed by private funds because civic service missions associated with private funds are evaluated by funders who request quantified targets. To develop the booster programme more broadly, new funds will have to be found. At the local level, some interesting projects cannot be carried out because they require too much funding. At the same time, national education has a different culture from the Unis-cité association, if the partners on both sides are not sufficiently involved, and do not discuss among themselves, the support to young minors can quickly become inefficient. Obstacles linked to changes in partners, particularly on the national education side, with differences in the priority of the successors, can deconstruct dynamics on this type of programme. There also barriers related to the lack of tenacity of young dropouts. Getting involved in 8 months of civic service can be very long for a young dropout. In addition, apart from civic service missions, young people must also prepare their professional project, adapt themselves to their working team, and for some of them, fight their school phobias. Adapting to an audience of young dropouts is also a challenge for the Unis-cité teams because coordinators must have the profile to carry out this mission. Other challenges related to the successful implementation of the project are related to the lack of flexibility in public education and the difficulty of finding partners for civic service missions.

    Transferability & Replicability

    This project can be transferred to other communities. The ambition of the Unis-cités association would be to try to deploy at least one Booster programme in each national education academy. As soon as Unis-cité has access to an academy, this partnership gives access to several territories.

    Success Factors

    The method developed by this network of actors seems to be a major innovation in the field of early school dropout. The innovation concerns first of all the reverse method compared to the traditional methods previously proposed by the national education system or by integration organisations (academic upgrading, internships in companies, training). In the context of civic service, it is not the young person who is helped but the young person who will help others, which leads to a boost in the young person’s self-confidence. The impact is twofold: they engage in society and as a result, they help themselves. The coordination of actors is essential for the success of the programme. This requires an understanding of both the educational environment and popular education. While the two actors were initially able to operate as two parallel entities, it quickly became clear that coordination is essential for the Booster programme to be optimal. The territorial differences played an important role for the success of the project. The local offices offer quite different solutions depending on the context. The respondents pointed out that there is a great difference between rural and urban areas. In general, there are few solutions for young minors who drop out in rural areas, while solutions are often more numerous in urban areas.

    Lessons learned

    In the Booster programme, young people have 2 days of courses. One might think that the teaching method adopted was not only based on purely academic learning, but also on experimentation (personalised rhythm and social exchanges). However, practice shows that young people who agree to enter the Booster programme do not want to be differentiated in learning methods. They feel able to learn “like others” even if they have experienced failures with this method in their personal life. Another unexpected result concerns the themes of civic service missions offered to young dropouts. It appears that sustainable development missions are not generally appreciated by young dropouts. The reason could be that young dropouts are looking for direct solidarity missions, face-to-face with the beneficiary, as in the case of the restos du cœur. The missions relating to sustainable development have a concrete dimension, but solidarity is indirect, the beneficiaries are potentially all people, and also concerns future generations. Dropouts may not have the necessary distance to realise this.  

    Zero Long-Term Unemployed Territory (TZCLD)

    The “zero long-term unemployed territory” (TZCLD) project has at its centre the “Job Factory” which is a Job-Oriented Company (JOCs). Its purpose is to solve long-term unemployment by involving a methodological innovation (a new recruitment method based on a reverse process), and an organizational innovation (the creation of a firm with an employment objective and a horizontal management).

    The project TZCLD was initiated by the association ATD Quart Monde (ATD Fourth World) in 2011, after being tested mid-1990 in Seiches-Sur-Le-Loir but not carried out to completion because the financing package proposed required a change in the French law.  After ATD Quart Monde won the support of a Parliamentarian, Laurent Grandguillaume, who defended the project at the National Assembly, the “Zero long-term unemployed Territory” (TZCLD) association was created in October 2016 to pursue the project at a national level. A law was voted on 29 February 2016 to enforce the TZCLC project, and 10 experimental territories, financed for 5 years, were chosen in November. The project is currently in the testing phase.

    The idea of the project is to be able to offer to any unemployed person in a given territory, a job adapted to his/her know-how, paid at the guaranteed minimum wage, based on an indeterminate duration contract, for a chosen period of time. Unemployed persons are hired by the JOCs, which are created for the purpose of this project. These JOCs fall within the scope of the Social and Solidarity Economy. They propose indeterminate duration employment contracts with guaranteed minimum wages. The unemployed persons create their own jobs on the basis of their know-how, their desires, and the needs of the territory. The jobs created must not compete with the activities of “traditional” incumbent companies.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The main beneficiaries are the ten authorized territories for the testing phase. These territories are the following ones: Pipriac and Saint-Ganton (Ille-et-Vilaine), Mauléon (Deux-Sèvres), Thiers (Puy-de-Dôme), Jouques (Bouches-du-Rhône), Villeurbanne, Saint-Jean Disctrict (Rhône ), the Community of Commons (between Nièvres and Forests) (Nièvre), Paris 13th, the Community of communes Pays de Colombey and South Toulon (Meurthe-et-Moselle), the European Metropolis of Lille (North) and Colombelles (Calvados). This experiment targets the long-term unemployed, who have been deprived of jobs or employees who have been in a reduced activity for more than one year. The eligibility criteria are i) to be unemployed for more than one year and ii) to be domiciled in the selected territory for at least 6 months. Around 1,000 to 2,000 people for the whole set of territories are expected to benefit. This national project, and the corresponding local experiments, is carried out by a network of public and associative actors (such as regional and local authorities, the National Employment Agency (Pôle emploi); associations fighting unemployment and exclusion, Social and Solidarity Economy companies. In each of the authorized territories, a local steering committee is created. The committee includes the local authority concerned, a representative of the State, the National Employment Agency, employers’ and employees’ unions, ordinary companies and the person who will set up the company that aims to create employment, associations whose purpose is to combat unemployment and reduce social exclusions, and all representatives of the persons concerned by the project.

    Co-creation process

    This project comes from the associative world, the innovation process is bottom-up. The first experiment (1995) could not be completed because of legal rigidities. Thus, the members of this Bottom-up project had to find other associative partners to give credibility to the project, as well as the support of a parliamentarian so that the project could be validated by the government on a national level, and be launched. Therefore, at this stage, the innovation network moved to a top-down approach. Therefore, it is a nice process of co-creation of public services by the government at different levels and by a network of associations. The TZCLD project includes the creation of Job-Oriented Companies, which objective is to provide long-term unemployed with jobs that meet their personal projects as well as the unsatisfied needs of the territory. The management mode of these companies is based on horizontality and transversality functions and participatory work. The management of the activity is done collectively, employees establish their working conditions. Jobseekers are project leaders. Every day, people innovate about how to work together.

    Digital Transformation Process

    The main innovation is a conceptual and social innovation, rather than digital transformation. This project applies to long-term unemployment, on a given territory, a business model already used to enable disabled people to work. This methodological innovation leads to organizational innovations (the creation of a job-oriented company); an innovative financial mechanism (the reallocation of unemployment-related expenses and costs to enable employment); and informational innovations (development of communication tools, management tools…).

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    Many (human, societal and economic) benefits derived from the TZCLD experiment. These expected benefits can be split according to the type of beneficiary: – For the long-term unemployed, the benefit is gaining a “right to work”, in order to get out from exclusion. The experiment is still ongoing but the first observations indicate that the beneficiaries of the Hauts-de-France experiment have been reintegrated into society, at least at the civic level and through social ties. – For local economic actors, the benefit is to have access to a potentially available workforce, This workforce accepts to do useful works that is not completely solvent on the market place. – For the territory, the main interest of a JOC is to recreate territorial social links.  As the local labor is locally prepared, this makes it possible to locate or relocate productions or services on the territory. – For the economy of the country: On the economic level, JOCs contribute to taxes and social contributions, they create value. Permanent job creations boost purchasing power. It also reduce social problem issues such as health problems, school dropouts, etc).

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    At the national level, the project met barriers from the financial administration which was reluctant to have to advance public funds without being assured of the success of the experiment. It was also necessary to convince the government and members of Parliament of the non-destruction of employment. It has been decided to create local committees to ensure this non-competition. This fear of competition has slowed down the start of this project. At the local level, the barriers may be human, financial technical and territory-related. As for the challenges, one of the main is that jobs created must not compete with existing jobs. Also, when this experiment will be over, if the process continues, all partners/organisations who are currently concerned by indirect costs (such as social security) will have to pay the corresponding amount of money. Currently, the cost is covered by the territorial Fund. In each local experiment, researchers are currently working on indicators that will have to establish the social prevention that has been carried out on the territory thanks to this experience.

    Transferability & Replicability

    Given the difficulties related to territories, this project could be extended to other interested communities but not generalised to all territories. Sometimes, local authorities are not enthusiastic to create activities from grassroots contributions, they may be afraid of losing their authority. Thus, the success of the project depends on the involvement of the territorial stakeholders. The project can only work on the logic of volunteering. Such a system cannot be established by the government without the approval of the unemployed. This means that generalisation across the country will not be possible.

    Success Factors

    As the project is in the inception phase, it is not yet possible to evaluate its success. However, a large number of jobs have already been created. The number of contractual workforces from January 2017 to June 2018 in the 10 territories included in the project has increased from 33 to 564 people.

    Lessons learned

    The lessons learned so far will focus on the weight of the state regulation in this social issue, on the importance of building the project on existing links on local territories, on the nature of the jobs created by the JOC, and finally on the importance of the choice of the territory. The first lesson learned is that social innovation including national social issues are impossible to implement solely with a bottom-up process. This type of project as TZCLD can only be achieved with the intervention of the government in terms of regulation. Another important lesson is related to the importance of existing territorial networks to implement the project. The network of partners at the local level may be different from the national network of partners. First, because national partners do not always have local branches on the authorized territories, while partners must belong to the territory to take advantage of existing social links, and to favour the creation of links with other partners at the local level. When it comes to the nature of activities created by the JOCs, it is necessary to clearly identify the role of each stakeholder of a TZCLD territory to send the long-term unemployed to the most appropriate structure according to its degree of exclusion, in order to avoid the destruction of value. Finally, the nature and size of the chosen territory is an essential element for the success of the project. The local level creates social bonds that cannot be achieved at a macroeconomic level. The identification of needs, and of competing activities can also only be established on a very limited territory.

    MAIA Method

    The MAIA method (Method of action for the integration of healthcare and support services in the field of Autonomy) was launched in 2008, with the aim of overcoming the barriers of service systems fragmentation regarding populations in vulnerable situations. The implementation of the method was assigned to the regional health agencies (ARS).

    If several coordination mechanisms have been tested before the MAIA method in France, the MAIA method especially differs from these mechanisms by the inclusion of a case management system which supports home-isolated elderly. It creates value directly for the final user (his/her well-being, respect of the will of elderly people, restore home care).

    The MAIA method aims to ensure the decision-making process between stakeholders by setting up meetings at a local level between decision-makers and funders of gerontological policies (strategic level), and between the local operators responsible for the healthcare and support services that help seniors to stay at home (operational level). Currently, the MAIA method is a public policy institutionalized in the Family and social action code.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    The value creation of the MAIA method is first to improve the efficiency of the elderly pathway and the well-being of users (by improving the quality of care, the accessibility to services). The value creation is also directed towards professionals (as users of the MAIA office) and user’s family as it seeks to avoid the bad quality of answers given to the user’s family, to caregivers and health professionals. The MAIA method also create value via the professional dynamics generated through the harmonization and standardization of professional practices (by working on shared common tools, sharing knowledge, implementing protocols as a means to improve quality and equity). Partnership value is created over time by the mobilization of professionals, the pilot, and the case manager (identification of new resource persons). This dynamic should improve the service system (by identifying missing services, to avoid service disruption and wrong orientations, creating co-responsibility, by adjusting the offer to the needs). Finally, at an economic scale, it concerns citizens as taxpayers, the reduction of non-quality costs should reduce the amount of taxes.

    Co-creation process

    If the MAIA method is originally top-down, the deployment is left to the initiative of the MAIA pilot: this approach requires a bottom up process because the priorities and drivers of actions, which enable this method to be implemented, must emerge from the partners themselves. The MAIA system requires the commitment and the co-empowerment of stakeholders of the health, medico-social and social sectors. However, this co-empowerment is not spontaneously developed, especially in the context of instability of the ARS teams. In the MAIA system, the value is created by the whole set of professional partners who participate to the working groups to create common communication tools (e.g. orientation forms), who also try to articulate and adjust the existing committees with the tactical table. For example, the development of an integrated, one-stop service, can only be done with the partners (meetings, training). The value is created by all the stakeholders. They create the final value for the benefit of the user (through training, tool sharing, but also by transmitting information about dysfunctions of the system or transferring information about elderly people in precarious situation). They also use the MAIA framework themselves to find contacts and to orient patients towards case managers.

    Digital Transformation Process

    The MAIA method is more a social innovation, rather than digital transformation, which seeks to transform the health system by implementing new forms of organization of collective work.   Nevertheless, it implies a digital innovation related to MAIA’s three communication tools. (a) A shared Multidimensional Analysis Form (used by professionals from the one-step services) and the multidimensional assessment tool (used by case managers). (b) The Individualized Service Plan (PSI). It is a case management tool used to define and to plan in a consistent manner all the interventions provided to the elderly in a complex situation. (c) Shared information systems (it gathers information from the one-stop service, from the MAIA pilot, and from the case managers …). It requires the development of a common shared information system and action-steering tools, to create a directory database to identify local resources, and to be able to create the integrated, one-stop service.

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    One of the main value creations of the MAIA method is the improvement of the accessibility to services by providing an adapted answer to a problem. The aim is to avoid the bad quality of answers given to users, user’s family and caregivers. Thus, monitoring indicators have been developed and used during the implementation stage of the MAIA method especially to assess the number of contacts a senior must have established to access to the right resource. The result is that the integration of orientation counters into a one-step services simplifies people’s pathway and substantially reduce the number of contacts. At the local level, the impact in terms of organization is measured in different ways, such as the participation rate of partners at the tactical table, or the territorial distribution of seniors being managed for the case management. Regarding the participation rate of partners, the results indicate that the participants to the tactical tables are always the same volunteers, actors who encounter difficulties in their daily practice do not often wish to participate (as this could be viewed as failure) and general practitioners are rarely part of the table.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    Before the denomination of “Method of action for the integration of healthcare and support services in the field of autonomy”, the acronym MAIA was used for “House for autonomy and integration of Alzheimer disease”. The use of the first denomination of « MAIA » as a « House » resulted in a misunderstanding of the method.   Beyond the misunderstanding of the denomination, the notion of integration is not well understood by a lot of actors. Actors are often seeking for interstitial measures, such as accommodation solution after hospitalization, Psychogeriatric mobile team, night nurse, etc. But these interstitial measures are clinical solutions instead of an integration system. Moreover, the MAIA method needs time to be implemented, because trust and relationships between actors take time to appear. Another barrier comes from the competition between the MAIA project and other national projects from which objectives are close to the MAIA method. On the top of that, there is a problem with the choice of the territory. The MAIA pilot must first choose the geographical territory that will be affected by the method and within which professionals will be contacted. This choice is important because it has to correspond to Regional Health Authorities, which are coordinating the project. The result of the experimental phase showed that the private actor as a holder of the project is not appropriate because it could lead to conflict of interest. It also poses a problem of data confidentiality.  

    Transferability & Replicability

    The MAIA method is transferable. MAIAs were tested on 17 sites in France to refine tools, work procedures, and training content for case managers. Following this experiment, the method was extended on the French territory. Currently, the MAIA method is a public policy institutionalized in the Family and social action code.  

    Success Factors

    The MAIA method as social innovation led to a methodological and organizational method: The MAIA project is a working method disseminated all over the territory so that the healthcare, social and medico-social actors of local territories work better collectively. Therefore, it leads to organizational local innovation: various stakeholders innovate together in order to find corrective measures to organizational dysfunctions observed on the local territory. This method promotes the mutual adjustment of each other actor’s missions. Otherwise, the actors may ignore each other by lack of legibility of the system, or may feel in competition with each other.  

    Lessons learned

    A partially unexpected result is about the role of private partners and the data privacy issue raised by the concept of integration. The integration process implies the participation of private partners. The private partners could be the holder of the MAIA project. During the experimental phase, the “Private holder” management did not work for reasons of conflict of interest, which results in a problem of credibility of the (private) holder. The other professionals of the territory do not accept the holder and its practices. This lack of credibility is compounded with the problem of confidentiality of patient data. The private holder may use this data to charge services or may not protect these data enough.

    The MAIA method (Method of action for the integration of healthcare and support services in the field of Autonomy)

    The case study examines the MAIA method (Method of action for the integration of healthcare and support services in the field of Autonomy). It is an organisational model adapted to local specificities. The increase in life expectancy and the ageing of the population have led to the problem of old-age dependency. Gerontological answers exist, but in France, coordination between the healthcare, social and medico-social fields is not sufficiently articulated and remains hospital-centred. These institutional, organisational and clinical fragmentations have serious consequences for the health pathways of elderly people. They cause discontinuities in elderly care (healthcare, support, waiting list in specialised institutions [Ehpad]), as well as contradictory decisions between professionals. This poor coordination makes the health system more expensive (emergency hospitalisation, hospital re-admission). To manage these dysfunctions, researchers have proposed to public decision-makers to establish an integration strategy, according to the Quebec concept, by adapting it to the features of the French system, and specifically by maintaining the centralised health insurance system. The purpose is not to create new structures but to organise and enhance the clarity of the healthcare and support system by ensuring the articulation and coherence of existing resources in the healthcare, social and medico-social fields.

    Stakeholders & Beneficiaries

    MAIA aims to ensure the decision-making process (interaction, collaboration) between stakeholders at two levels: at a strategic level – in order to develop a collaborative and decision-making space between decisionmakers and funders of gerontological policies (ARS, departmental councils, and others); at a tactic level – in order to create a collaborative and decision-making space between the operators responsible for the healthcare and support services that help seniors to stay at home. For seniors in complex situations, an intensive and long-term follow-up (including during hospitalisation periods) is implemented by a case manager (a new professional skill). This professional is the direct contact with the senior, with the general practitioner, with the professionals working at the senior’s home, and becomes the referent of complex situations.

    Co-creation process

    At the institutional level, there is a top-down approach to co-creation, designed to better fit the realities of the territories: the Regional Health Agency selects, via a call for application, an infra-departmental institution (non-profit organisation) which can mobilise local actors. This non-profit will be in charge of implementing the MAIA pilot on its territory, by connecting the professionals in healthcare to fit the territorial reality. At the user level, the co-creation materialises through the dialogue between the senior (the user) and the case manager, who becomes the spokesperson for the user and translates the user’s needs and wishes to the healthcare professionals (sometimes against the advices of the health professionals).

    Results, Outcomes & Impacts

    In its interactions with the users and professionals, the care manager helps to improve the organisation of the care system by identifying any dysfunctions observed on the territory.

    Challenges & Bottlenecks

    According to Policy maker, MAIA activity reports are done by the MAIAs but require a thorough understanding. Starting to introduce indicators for measuring value creation raises problems relating to the instrumentalisation of such indicators. Ideally, a territorial roadmap used by all the operational actors would be interesting to develop, but given the fact that data would be analysed on a very small territorial scale and then structured at a regional and national level, it requires money and tools. This is not done today. Monitoring indicators have been developed and used during the implementation stage of the MAIA method (e.g. number of contacts a senior must have established to access to the right resource). Currently at the local level, the impact in terms of organisation is measured (participation rate of partners at the tactical table, or for the case management, the territory distribution of seniors being managed). It has been noted that the participants to the tactical tables are always the same volunteers, actors who encounter difficulties in their daily practice do not often wish to participate (as this could be viewed as failure) and general practitioners are rarely part of the table. According to the pilot at the local level, a tool has been evaluated, but there is no local evaluation of the value creation of the MAIA for the territory. It would be interesting to know for example the impact of MAIA on the reduction of hospitalisation in emergencies, the reduction of user orientation towards wrong services. The partners should be involved to create these indicators. For the case management, the value creation is evaluate via the decreasing needs of the senior that the case manager has to fulfill. The creation of value can be measured via satisfaction surveys but this is not a global value creation, that is, the medico-social system as a whole. Care Pathways Operational Committees are currently working on impact indicators (non-use of emergency, scheduled hospitalisation). The current problem is that the databases are currently partitioned between the medico-social, social and sanitary field, so there are difficulties to measure the impacts on a pathway of a user. Finally, MAIA is on a voluntary basis, so there is no incentive (legal, financial), for professionals who are solicitated to take part in brainstorming sessions and one can find always the same people involved.

    Transferability & Replicability

    This initiative is applicable to the various sub-territories of the French regions, because of its very locally-oriented – and even user-oriented approach. The concept is therefore replicable to other territories. Also, the MAIA project was already copied from a similar initiative in Quebec, Canada.

    Success Factors

    An integrated, one-stop service provides, at any place of the territory, a harmonised answer adapted to the needs of the users, by directing them towards the adequate resource. It integrates all the reception and orientation counters of the territory. The MAIA method includes the development of common information-sharing tools and action-steering tools (a shared multi-dimensional analysis form, a standardised multidimensional needs assessment tool, and individualised service plan). If the MAIA method is originally top-down, once the project holder chosen by the network, the deployment is left to the initiative of the Maia pilot. Thus, this method is deployed on territories in very different even innovative ways, depending on the diversity of actors and networks already existing on the territory. Thus, the approach is considered as “help-it happen” by the policymakers. Various forms of MAIA multi-stakeholder networks have emerged at a territorial level.

    Lessons learned

    All respondents have stressed that it is difficult to determine the moment of value creation. National and regional public manager, partners, pilots agree on the fact that the creation of value of the MAIA method is mostly upstream, as a back-office function, during the constitution of the network, when the pilot and the partners discuss together to facilitate the articulation between services (creation of a professional dynamic). The users here are the partners. Thus, the value creation takes place before the services are delivered. However, the respondents point at that the value creation is also continuous, throughout the accompaniment of seniors all over the care process (according to the national and regional public manager and partners). When a single patient joins the healthcare system, this is value creation. According to the case manager, the value is created once the professional chain around the senior is stable and complete. Thus, mostly once the service is delivered, even if the senior monitoring continues to be provided.