目的－近年來社會企業的理念，在歐美逐漸盛行，相當受到非營利組織的重視與推廣，其中最被廣泛注意的是能夠產生重大改變的社會創新議題，社會創新的重要性在於它超越了傳統對於一般所認為的政府、企業、與第三部門之間界限的限制，所以社會創新可以在任何的領域中發生，如營利性組織、學術界或政策的領域上。本研究旨在於了解社會創新之內涵，及其擴散到其他非營利組織應用之可行性。

研究問題－乃從國內外相關文獻分析，了解社會創新的意涵與發展，並藉由四個文化型的非營利組織個案研究，省視社會創新的價值與重要性，以作為爾後社會創新研究發展，同時給予其他非營利組織參考建議，所以引發本研究以下四個問題：社會創新之浮現背景為何？社會創新之發展現況為何？社會創新之運作成效為何？社會創新在其他非營利組織應用之可行性為何？

研究方法－以文獻分析法與三角檢核法為主，研究對象則是二○○八年以後重新由台北市文化基金會受託管理的四個機構，包括西門紅樓、台北偶戲館、台北國際藝術村、台北當代藝術館，以立意抽樣方法進行半結構式之訪談。訪談大綱主要以內容、過程和授能三個面向去設計訪談問題。訪談過程以錄音為主，紀錄為輔，避免遺漏非口語訊息，分析研究目的。

分析－研究發現四個機構舉辦的活動都滿具有獨特性，並且也兼顧到社會目標的使命，而不論與政府、企業或其他組織的關係，都保持良好的互動關係，也逐漸意識到所屬的社區與自身的發展有緊連的關係，所以滿重視與社區的合作，至於四個機構本身都沒有辦理固定的、長期的教育訓練，但是卻仍鼓勵進修外面的課程研習，並且強調志工培訓這一塊，最後四個機構雖然利用傳統的溝通管道，如開會、寄電子郵件等方式，但自主權與參與度都滿高的。

研究建議－本研究先針對四個機構從內容、過程與授能面向給予建議，同時給予其他非營利組織欲採行社會創新策略，應學習的經驗與其注意的風險，最後提出後續研究建議，以供日後對於此議題有興趣的研究者一個參考方向。

The idea of social enterprises in recent years, prevails gradually in America and Europe, quite paying attention to nonprofit organization, and attach importance to social innovation discussion that change extensively among them. The importance of social innovation is that cuts across traditional boundaries separating government, for-profit business, and nonprofit organization. To generally thinking, social innovation can take place in any fields, such as in profit organization, field of academia or the policy. The purpose of research lies in that understands the meaning of social innovation, and the feasibility used in other nonprofit organization.
Subjects for the four cases in trust of Taipei Culture Foundation in 2008, including Red House, Museum of Contemporary Art Taipei, Taipei Artist Village, and the Puppetry Arts Center of Taipei. Qualitative approach with purposive sampling and semi-structured interview is adapted to this study. The data analysis is based on social innovation literature, and can be analyzed by following three aspects: content dimension, process dimension, empowerment dimension.
The finding of research reveals that four organization’s activities are unique, and look after both sides (social goal and mission). No matter the relations with government, for-profit business, and nonprofit organization, can maintain the good relation with them. They realize gradually social capital is very important that start to resonate and cooperate within the community. Besides, the four cases do not have complete education training, but encourage employees and volunteers to join in external courses. Although they make use of traditional communication channel, such as having a meeting or electronic mail, etc. In a word, the four cases have a high degree of participation.

Adams, D. and M. Hess (n.d.). Social innovation as a new public administration
strategy. Retrieved October 25, 2008, from
http://www.irspm2008.bus.qut.edu.au/papers/documents/pdf/Hess%20&%20Adams%20-%20Social%20innovation%20as%20a%20new%20Public%20Administration%20Strategy%20-%20IRSPM%202008.pdf
Ashford, N. A. (2001). Technological, organisational, and social innovation as
pathways to sustainability. The steilmann report: the wealth of people: An
intelligenteconomy for the 21st century.233-274.
Barraud, V. and S. Guerrero (2002). Impact of social innovations on French
companies’ performance. Measuring Business Excellence, 6(2):42-48.
Bloustien, G. (2008). Defining social innovation and methodology of the paper.
Paper presented at The History & Future of Social Innovation Conference, South Australia.
Brehm, J. (2003). Social capital and poor communities. Contemporary Socilology,
132(3):345-346.
Buchman, C and E. Hannum (2001). Education and stratification in developing
countries: A review of theories and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 27:
77-102.
Chesbrough, H (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and
profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Dees, G., B. Anderson and J. Wei-Skillern (2004). Scaling social impact: Strategies for
spreading social innovations. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 1(4):24-32.
Fairweather, G. W. and W.S. Davidson (1986). Community experimentation. NY:
McGraw-Hill Press.
Gardner, C. A., T. Acharya and D. Yach (2007). Technological and social innovation:
A unifying new paradigm for global health. Health Affairs, 26(4):1052-1061.
Hazel, K. L. and E. Onaga (2003). Experimental social innovation and dissemination:
The promise and its delivery. American Journal of Community Psychology,
32(3):285-294.
Henley, M. (2008). Success in social innovation in South Australia-what has
happened? what has worked? Paper presented at The History & Future of Social Innovation Conference, South Australia.
Hetherington, D. (2008). Case studies in social innovation. Australia: Per Capita
Press.
Hillier, J., F. Moulaert and J. Nussbaumer (2004). Three tests on the role of social
innovation in the development space. Geography economy company, 6:129-152.

James, A., J. Phills, K. Deiglmeier and D. Miller (2008). Rediscovering social
innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 3:34-43.
Moulaert, F. (2002). Globalisation and integrated area development in European
cities. Oxford University Press.
Moulaert, F., F. Martinelli, E. Swyngedouw and S. Gonzalez (2005). Towards
alternative model(s) of local innovation. Urban Studies, 42(11):1969-1990.
Mulgan, G. (2006). The process of social innovation. Innovations: Technology,
Governance, Globalization, 1(2):145-162.
Mulgan, G., S. Tucker, R. Ali and B. Sanders (2006). Social innovation. Oxford
University Press.
Mulgan, G., R. Ali, R. Halkett and B. Sanders (2007). In and out of sync: The
challenge of growing social innovations. NESTA Press.
Mumford, M. D. (2002). Social innovation: Ten cases from Benjamin Franklin.
Creativity Research Journal, 14(2):253-266.
Mumford, M. D. and P. Moertl (2003). Case of social innovation: Lessons from two
innovations in the 20th century. Creativity Research Journal, 15(2):261-266.
Murray, R., G. Mulgan and J. Caulier-Grice (2008). Generating social innovation:
Setting and agenda, shaping methods and growing the field. Retrieved April
20, 2009, from http://www.socialinnovationexchange.org/publicationsarticles
Neuloh, O. (1984). Social Innovation: History, theory, internationalization. In C. G.
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research method: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches.MA: Boston Press.
OCED (1999). Social Enterprises. OECD.
OCED (2003). The non-profit sector in a changing economy. OECD.
Pomerantz, M. (n.d.). Social Entrepreneurship in the Pacific Northwest. Retrieved
May19, 2009, from
http://www.mealexchange.com/index2.php?option=comcontent&dopdf=1&id=42
Pot, F. and F. Vaas (2008). Social innovation, The new challenge for Europe.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
57(6):468-473.
Putnam, R. C. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy.
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sayani, K. (2003). Thibodeau’s centre for healing health and communication: A
successful model of social entrepreneurship. Edmonton: The Canadian centre
for social entrepreneurship Press.
Schumpter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into
profits, capital, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Shaw, E. (2004). Marketing in the social enterprise context: Is it entrepreneurial?
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 7(3):194-205.
Stewart-Weeks, M. (2008). Social innovation: Flavoursome fad or future fix?
Retrieved May25, 2009, from http://www.socialinnovationexchange.org/node/300
Stohl, C. and G. Cheney (2001). Participatory processes/paradoxical practices:
Communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication Quarterly, 14(3):349-407.
Tanimoto, K. (2006). Social innovation cluster in action: A case study of the San
Francisco bay area. Hitotsubashi Journal Commerce and Management,
41:1-17.
Vitale, T. (2006). Contradiction and reflexivity in social innovation-A case study
from the de-institutionalization movement. Retrieved October 25, 2008, from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=922560
Westley, F. (2008). The social innovation dynamic. Retrieved December 24, 2008,
from
http://www.sig.uwaterloo.ca/documents/TheSocialInnovationDynamic001.pdf
Wingham, R. (1997). Guaranteed electronic markets: The backbone of the twenty
first century economy? London: Demos Press.
Yeung, M. (2007). Social innovation in Canada. Ingredients for learning research
paper, 2-15.
Young Foundation (2007). Making the most of local innovations: What makes
places innovative and how local innovations can be best exploited. NESTA Press.