Engaging the youth through public-sector innovation labs: Insights from Innovation Lab cases in Thailand and the Philippines

Article Sidebar

Published: Feb 27, 2024
Keywords:
Philippines Public Sector Innovation Labs Public Policy Thailand Youth participation

Main Article Content

Antonio D. Salazar Jr.
University of the Philippines Tacloban College; School of Public Policy, Chiang Mai University
Noe John Joseph E. Sacramento
University of the Philippines Cebu; School of Public Policy, Chiang Mai University

Abstract

This paper investigates youth participation in public sector innovation labs PSI Labs in Thailand and the Philippines specifically analyzing two cases—the Chiang Mai City Lab in Thailand and the Youth Social Innovation Lab (YSIL) in the Philippines. Public policy literature on PILs considers public innovation labs as a space and medium for co-design, co-learning, and co-implementation of policies. In Southeast Asia, PSI Labs have become a unique strategy in addressing social problems. Some of these PSI labs were designed to promote youth participation—digital natives who have the energy and the stakes to address concerns in the public sector. However, understanding how these spaces enable youth participation in engaging the public sector is limited. To address this gap in literature, this paper explored how the youth are engaged and empowered to participate in addressing public problems. Drawing from existing literature on youth involvement in policy processes, we scrutinized the Chiang Mai City Lab and YSIL, exploring how these innovation labs foster and leverage youth participation. Using lesson drawing as an analytical lens, we examined policy documents, program designs, and relevant secondary literature. Our findings reveal a diverse range of strategies employed to engage youth and integrate their perspectives in addressing public problems. The study also highlighted how digitalization played a crucial role in furthering youth participation. Overall, this research provides nuanced insights into the dynamics of public sector innovation labs, emphasizing their transformative potential as platforms for youth-driven policy development.

Article Details

How to Cite
Salazar, A. J., & Sacramento, N. J. J. (2024). Engaging the youth through public-sector innovation labs: Insights from Innovation Lab cases in Thailand and the Philippines. NIDA Case Research Journal, 14(1). Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/NCRJ/article/view/268941
Issue
Vol. 14 No. 1 (2022): NIDA CASE RESEARCH JOURNAL
Section
Case Study
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Author Biographies

Antonio D. Salazar Jr., University of the Philippines Tacloban College; School of Public Policy, Chiang Mai University

Antonio D. Salazar Jr. is a political science faculty member of the Division of Social Sciences, University of the Philippines Tacloban College. He is also an MA in Public Policy student of the School of Public Policy, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, under the CMU Presidential Scholarship. His research interest is the dynamics of and interconnections of public policy, Asia as method, posthuman theory, and climate justice. 

Noe John Joseph E. Sacramento, University of the Philippines Cebu; School of Public Policy, Chiang Mai University

Noe John Joseph E. Sacramento is an assistant professor in political science at the College of Social Sciences, University of the Philippines Cebu. He is also a Ph.D. in Public Policy candidate at the School of Public Policy, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, under the CMU Presidential Scholarship. His research interest is critical policy studies and policy analysis involving informal deliberations, narratives, and emotions. He has published several articles in peer-reviewed and indexed international journals like the Journal of Asian Public Policy, Public Administration and Policy, and Thammasat Review

References

Bakırlıoğlu, Y., & McMahon, M. (2021). Co-learning for sustainable design: The case of a circular design collaborative project in Ireland. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279, 123474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123474

Boossabong, P., & Chamchong, P. (2023). Hope, fear and public policy: Towards empathetic policy process. Critical Policy Studies, 0(0), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2023.2247048

Brandsen, T., Steen, T., & Verschuere, B. (2018). Co-Production and Co-Creation: Engaging Citizens in Public Services (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315204956

Cairney, P. (2020). Understanding public policy: Theories and issues (2nd ed). Macmillan international higher education Red globe press.

Checkoway, B. (2011). What is youth participation? Children and Youth Services Review, 33(2), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.09.017

Cole, L. (2022). A framework to conceptualize innovation purpose in public sector innovation labs. Policy Design and Practice, 5(2), 164–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2021.2007619

De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. (2016). Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda. Public Administration, 94(1), 146–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12209

Dunn, W. N. (2017). Public Policy Analysis: An Integrated Approach (6th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315181226

Forester, J. (1999). The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. MIT Press.

Frank, K. I. (2006). The Potential of Youth Participation in Planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 20(4), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412205286016

Gerston, L. N. (2014). Public Policy Making (0 ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315701387

Gryszkiewicz, L., Lykourentzou, I., & Toivonen, T. (2016). Innovation Labs: Leveraging Openness for Radical Innovation? (SSRN Scholarly Paper 2556692). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2556692

Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in Governance and Public Services: Past and Present. Public Money & Management, 25(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2005.00447.x

Horelli, L., & Kaaja, M. (2002). OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS OF ‘INTERNET-ASSISTED URBAN PLANNING’ WITH YOUNG PEOPLE. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1–2), 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0246

James, O., & Lodge, M. (2003). The Limitations of ‘Policy Transfer’ and ‘Lesson Drawing’ for Public Policy Research. Political Studies Review, 1(2), 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/1478-9299.t01-1-00003

McGann, M., Blomkamp, E., & Lewis, J. M. (2018). The rise of public sector innovation labs: Experiments in design thinking for policy. Policy Sciences, 51(3), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-9315-7

McGann, M., Wells, T., & Blomkamp, E. (2021). Innovation labs and co-production in public problem solving. Public Management Review, 23(2), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1699946

Menny, M., Palgan, Y. V., & McCormick, K. (2018). Urban Living Labs and the Role of Users in Co-Creation. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 27(1), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.S1.14

Mintrom, M., & Luetjens, J. (2016). Design Thinking in Policymaking Processes: Opportunities and Challenges: Design Thinking in Policymaking Processes. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 75(3), 391–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12211

Pestoff, V. (2014). Collective Action and the Sustainability of Co-Production. Public Management Review, 16(3), 383–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2013.841460

Ravetz, J., & Miles, I. D. (2016). Foresight in cities: On the possibility of a “strategic urban intelligence.” Foresight, 18(5), 469–490. https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-06-2015-0037

Rose, R. (1991). What is Lesson-Drawing? Journal of Public Policy, 11(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00004918

Sacramento, N. J. J. E., & Boossabong, P. (2021). Technocratic and deliberative nexus in policy analysis: Learning from smart city planning in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2021.2007210

Satinitigan, K. (2014, August 23). Introducing innovation in the public sector: Experience from the Philippines. UN Global Pulse. https://www.unglobalpulse.org/2014/08/introducing-innovation-in-the-public-sector-experience-from-the-philippines/

Sillak, S., Borch, K., & Sperling, K. (2021). Assessing co-creation in strategic planning for urban energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, 74, 101952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101952

UNDP Philippines. (2019, November 21). Young Filipino Innovators Gather for UNDP Youth Social Innovation Lab. Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/philippines/press-releases/young-filipino-innovators-gather-undp-youth-social-innovation-lab

UNDP Philippines. (2021, February 2). Young Filipino Innovators Showcase Their Ideas for the Future at the Youth Social Innovation Lab 2020. Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/philippines/press-releases/young-filipino-innovators-showcase-their-ideas-future-youth-social-innovation-lab-2020

Xia, F., Yang, L. T., Wang, L., & Vinel, A. (2012). Internet of Things. International Journal of Communication Systems, 25(9), 1101–1102. https://doi.org/10.1002/dac.2417

Zivkovic, S. (2018). Systemic innovation labs: A lab for wicked problems. Social Enterprise Journal, 14(3), 348–366. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEJ-04-2018-0036