Findings from a large and growing body of transdisciplinary research offer useful insights for a deeper understanding of the relationships between social innovation and governance. In this article, social innovation (SI) is defined as practices that aim to satisfy neglected human needs, based on collective actions and tighter social relations, potentially generating socio-political transformations. Governance is defined as ‘new ways of governing’, including participatory and collective decision-making, along with conventional forms of government. The authors discuss commonalities and differences in the understanding of both concepts. Both social innovation and governance often involve collaborative practices between civil society organizations and public actors to develop alternative solutions to meet social needs, and often face comparable socio-political challenges. The authors review five academic areas (political science and public administration, urban and territorial studies, sociology, sustainability and ecology, and culture and creativity studies) to identify the most relevant dimensions linking social innovation and governance.

Objectives: The study reported in this article aimed to identify: (i) the most relevant applications supported by smart city infrastructure with an impact on the provision of healthcare; (ii) the types of technologies being used; (iii) the maturity levels of the applications being reported; and (iv) major barriers for their dissemination. Methods: A systematic review was performed based on a literature search. Results: A total of 44 articles were retrieved. These studies reported on smart city applications to support population surveillance, active ageing, healthy lifestyles, disabled people, response to emergencies, care services organization, and socialization. Conclusions: Most of the included articles were either of a descriptive and conceptual nature or in an early stage of development, which means that a major barrier for their dissemination is their lack of concreteness.

Background: Health care provided to older adults must take into account the characteristics of chronic diseases and the comorbidities resulting from ageing. However, health services are still too oriented towards acute situations. To overcome this problem, the World Health Organization (WHO) proposed a set of Age-Friendly Principles that seek to optimize the provision of health care for this population. This article aims to understand how such Principles are considered in the implementation of age-friendly health care worldwide. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to synthesize the literature on age-friendly health care in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations in the PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Results: The research identified 34 articles, with only seven recognizing the WHO Principles and only four using the implementation toolkit. In addition, in the context of primary care, three studies recognize the WHO Principles, but only two use the toolkit. Conclusions: The WHO Principles are being implemented in health care, but in a smaller scale than desired, which reveals possible flaws in their dissemination and standardization. Thus, a greater scientific investment in age-friendly health care should be considered, which represents a greater operationalization of the Principles and an evaluation of their effectiveness and impacts.

Since none of the existing systematic reviews of the literature related to smart cities have focused on smart cities applications using context-aware features, this study aims to provide a comprehensive view of (1) the characteristics of context-aware applications supported by smart cities’ infrastructures, (2) the characteristics of the context-aware technologies being used, and (3) the maturity level of the identified applications. An electronic search was conducted on Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore databases, combining relevant keywords. After the studies’ selection, 27 studies were included. The results show the interest in using context-aware features to develop smart cities’ applications targeting public health, tourism experience, urban mobility, active citizenship, shopping experience, management of urban infrastructures, public alerts, recommenders, and smart environments. Moreover, the applications reported by the included studies do not allow the execution of actions without the explicit consent of the users, and they integrate personal sensors, sensors deployed in the city and crowdsourcing mechanisms to acquire primary context attributes (i.e., location, activity, and environment) and secondary context attributes (i.e., speed, physical activity, points of interest, stress, and tourists’ emotions). In addition, the included studies present scarce details about context reasoning, data privacy, integrity, and confidentiality, data aggregation and accuracy, and data interoperability. Finally, the results also indicate low maturity level of the developed applications, which is evidenced by the lack of user-centred evaluations, as well as by the difficulty in integrating important technologies being developed for smart cities.

(1) Background: The motivational determinants of health professionals to choose and remain in the public sector have been increasingly addressed, including the customized approach of Public Service Motivation (PSM). However, to date, no systematic research overview has been performed in this domain, leaving the body of literature unstructured. This article fills this gap by assessing the motivational factors of choice for the public sector in the health field, and the conceptual and methodological trends of this research stream. (2) Methods: This study follows the PRISMA protocol to ascertain patterns in past research and inform researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. Eighty-nine documents published between 1998 and 2021 were retained after selecting them according to their theme and outlined goals. (3) Results: Common motivational determinants are remuneration, available resources, work conditions, and frequency of contact and interaction with patients. The PSM construct and scale are often employed as main frameworks, but there is also a concern in assessing motivation drawing on psychological constructs that reflect the challenging line of work and environment that is health care, such as presenteeism, stress, and perception of hindrances. (4) Conclusions: By focusing on health professionals’ motivation, this study contributes to a timely systematization in challenging times for health institutions and their human resources.