Can Cities Be the Source of Scalable Innovations?

(Illustration by iStock/mathisworks)

Systems change to address complex problems, including climate change, is hard to achieve. What little optimism remains to tackle such complex challenges is mostly placed in supranational schemes, such as the COP climate change conferences, or transformational national policy, such as the Green New Deal in the US. Solutions of grand design regularly disappoint, however, because of their high costs, the challenges of translating big plans to local needs, and ongoing disagreement and polarization about what works and what is detrimental.

There is hope on the skyline though. Urban innovation ecosystems can provide an alternative to grand schemes, and cities’ social sectors provide a source of ongoing innovation. Companies like Sidewalk Labs, a subsidiary of Alphabet that develops technologies for sustainable urban design, are transforming business as usual to solve complex urban problems. Social enterprises such as car-sharing programs are changing the nature of urban transportation and providing alternative options to individual car ownership. Through its iconic mobile showers, the San Francisco nonprofit LavaMae has found new ways to serve the homeless in the absence of more radical reforms of affordable housing. And the US Green Building Council (USGBC), an intermediary promoting energy-efficient construction, developed guidelines and rating systems for sustainable cities and neighborhoods.

Promising ideas are in ample supply, but the crucial question is: How can social innovators scale such innovations so that their local impact adds up to big solutions?

Urban Innovation Through Proofs of Concept

Green construction—one of the biggest frontiers of climate change mitigation—offers some important lessons about turning small wins into big solutions. What today looks like a no-brainer started with a daring experiment when, in 2003, the Chicago Center for Green Technology became the world’s first municipal building that was LEED Platinum-certified by the USGBC. The building features a ground-source heat pump system and an industry-leading building automation system that allows for central control of the building’s systems, showing what is possible in energy-efficient building design. The building served as a proof of concept for green construction, inspiring a long list of best practices in sustainable construction in Chicago, and the city is now one of the bright spots of energy-efficient buildings.

Proofs of concept including trailblazing green and net-zero buildings can provide valuable evidence that new practices and policies can be successful, which can then be used to persuade others to adopt similar approaches. Even when they are not immediately transformative, early initiatives can serve as “demonstration projects” for more significant systemic change. By focusing on achievable goals and demonstrating their effectiveness, small wins can help to build momentum and support for larger-scale efforts. They are also a source of valuable evidence that new practices and policies can be successful, which can then be used to persuade others to adopt similar approaches.

The well-rehearsed problem with small wins is that they often do not reach far enough. Investments in scaling them are often seen as being “too little, too late.” Scaling up social innovation takes time, but there are also varying ways it can be done. Strategies include organizational growth, advocacy, or the development of ecosystems that lend themselves to scale and influence each other. As ecosystems of networked organizations, cities provide the necessary scale, reach, and resources to bridge the gap between small wins and big problems.

From Experimentation to Diffusion of Urban Innovations

The innovative role of dynamic cities has been referred to as government by experiment. Experimentation is particularly important for climate governance, where cities have developed new ideas at an impressive rate. Currently, advances in climate change mitigation are limited less by a lack of existing technological solutions than by a lack of policies or programs for achieving their widespread adoption—think solar panels or electric vehicles. Cities often copy each other, and scaling up of path-breaking policies frequently happens through diffusion from one city to another.

Cities have often led the way on pushing civil rights forward through innovative solutions. Sanctuary city policies are an example of an innovation that spread from city to city and became more sophisticated over time. Municipal ID programs like Chicago’s CityKey learned from early failures of a similar effort in New York City that ran the danger of handing the Federal Government a list of undocumented immigrants, in part thanks to NYC’s active communication of “lessons learned.”

Diffusion between cities does not only happen on the level of city governments. In fact, city leaders often follow the pioneering innovations of civil society organizations. I recently published a study on LEED certification, the leading rating system for energy-efficient construction developed by the USGBC, that showed that the vibrancy of civil society explains why some cities have greater levels of green construction than others. I also found that cities were quicker to first adopt energy-efficient buildings where mission-driven organizations are actively involved in addressing social problems. Cities with greater civic capacity also ended up seeing more green buildings overall, because the values-oriented actions of civil society organizations showed what was possible and inspired others—even hotels, retailers, and banks—to follow suit.

The initiation power of civil society organizations does not end with “small wins.” Municipal governments are often inspired by the early actions of civil society organizations when it comes to adopting new practices and policies. The actions of these organizations serve as proof of concept, showing that new practices can be successful and effective. Considering the innovative capacity of urban organizations more broadly, municipal governments themselves are well-suited to shine a light on best practices and legitimize trailblazing solutions of social innovation leaders in the eyes of other, more hesitant players. Some small wins even turn into legislation.

The City of Cincinnati, for instance, passed a tax abatement program to incentivize new construction to replicate early achievements in green construction of the University of Cincinnati and the city’s zoo. City governments in cities with high civic capacity are more likely to pass policies that legitimize novel practices, as my study shows. In turn, they can shape the actions of mainstream businesses in the city that tend to adopt social innovations more slowly. By now, retailers like Starbucks, Target, and Kohl’s, banks like the Bank of America and Citicorp, and hotel chains like InterContinental and Marriott are now among the US leaders in green building adoption; when they open a new branch, it is likely to be LEED certified. It is this network of collaboration among experimenting civil society organizations and businesses, municipal governments with an ear on the ground, and supraregional intermediary organizations that allows urban innovation ecosystems to multiply small wins—green buildings—into big solutions—green cities.

Lessons for Learning In and Among Cities

What are the implications of these findings for social innovators and for achieving systemic change through the development of urban innovation ecosystems?

Encourage scalable innovation. First, social innovation leaders need to invest in innovations that are replicable, such as green construction or cutting-edge procedures for stakeholder governance that can be turned into universal guidelines, like those underlying LEED or B Corps certifications. These innovations should be designed with scalability in mind. An example of this is the development of parking solutions for electric bicycles in cities like Amsterdam or Lyon, or experiments with opportunity zones in Seattle. This also means pursuing innovations even if they do not provide immediate (social or financial) return on investment. Foundations can encourage a culture of experimentation by scouting innovative solutions in the urban community and boosting their application to other cities to see which solutions travel well.

Create synapses for within-city learning. Second, leaders need to bolster learning networks between organizations, particularly between municipal governments and civil society organizations. Many early adopters of green building, such as the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation in Palo Alto and the San Mateo Public Library, both in California, showcase how they used renewable materials and made their buildings more energy efficient in innovative ways. The City of Palo Alto, at the same time, regularly invites civil society actors to speak about their experiences and share their knowledge with others. Repeated network interactions between municipalities and local experimenters can create new synapses for knowledge exchange and mutual learning and act as stepping stones to sustainability pathways.

Invest in civic capacity. Third, governments and philanthropists can invest in civic capacity by supporting organizations that have leeway to innovate rather than being trapped in the nonprofit starvation cycle. This is important especially because governments and foundations often see major, complex problems as being best solved with massive investments in physical infrastructure, such as the New York seawall in response to rising sea levels. However, as sociologist Eric Klinenberg has persistently argued in his analyses of Hurricane Sandy and the COVID-19 pandemic, investments in social infrastructure are equally important for resilience. The ability of civil society organizations to contribute innovative solutions to material problems is another reason to emphasize investments in civic capacity. City governments should invest in programs supporting the development of hubs and supporting networks of the social innovation ecosystem and express a commitment to support organizations that socially innovate.

Orchestrate inter-city learning. Finally, foundations need to continue working with and contribute to developing intermediary organizations that can act as “orchestrators,” such as the US Green Building Council. The Rockefeller Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies have long been strong supporters of networks of city learning, such as 100 Resilient Cities and C40. Other leading supporters are the Urban Sustainability Directors Network (USDN) and Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI). However, there is a danger in relying on orchestration alone as these organizations can become driven by the smallest common denominator and quickly lose the edge of their early days. It is therefore equally important to continue to invest in local innovation to create systems change from the bottom up. Smaller, regional networks of like-minded city leaders can also create opportunities for cities that are left behind by big city networks.

The interplay between cities and civil society is crucial for advancing social innovations and achieving systemic change. By investing in replicable innovations, developing learning networks, and creating a supportive policy environment, leaders of cities and civil society can enable social innovations to scale up and have a broader impact. Municipal experimentation and diffusion between cities can facilitate the spread of successful innovations, leading to the creation of urban innovation ecosystems that support and drive systemic change. By focusing on learning within and between cities, we can move beyond grand designs and national schemes and instead work towards achieving real, lasting change through small wins in the social sector.

Read more stories by Christof Brandtner.