Mapping the Social Innovation Ecosystem in the Netherlands



In 2025, Utrecht University published a mapping study of the social innovation ecosystem in the Netherlands as part of the European Social Innovation Alliance (ESIA). The report “Mapping the Social Innovation Ecosystem in the Netherlands” provides an overview of the current state of social innovation in the Netherlands and explores the enabling and limiting factors that shape the development of social innovation initiatives.

The study was developed to support the establishment of a National Competence Centre (NCC) for Social Innovation in the Netherlands. It aims to bring together insights on social innovators, community-based initiatives, social enterprises, public actors, funders, knowledge institutions, support organisations and other ecosystem actors.

The report shows that social innovation in the Netherlands is no longer a marginal or purely experimental activity. Across the country, a diverse landscape of citizen initiatives, social enterprises, community cooperatives, advocacy groups and hybrid public-civil collaborations is addressing urgent societal challenges. These include poverty, inequality, migration, energy transition, food systems, housing, democratic renewal and the future of care.

At the same time, the Dutch social innovation ecosystem remains fragmented and difficult to navigate. Social innovators often work across sectors and policy domains, while existing systems are shaped by complex regulations, sectoral silos, short-term funding cycles and administrative procedures. This makes it difficult for many initiatives to grow, sustain their work and contribute to broader systemic change.

The study understands social innovation as new combinations and reconfigurations of social practices, social processes and social relations that aim to solve societal problems or better respond to needs in a specific field of action. In the Dutch context, social innovation is often less about technological invention and more about new forms of ownership, governance, cooperation, knowledge sharing and community building.



Key insights were:

Social innovators in the Netherlands are strongly mission-driven. They often work from values such as solidarity, equality, ownership, sustainability and community. Their initiatives challenge existing institutional routines and seek to create new ways of organising society.

The Dutch ecosystem is rich in initiatives, networks and resources, but it is also fragmented. There are many actors, programmes, funds and support structures, but social innovators often find it difficult to understand where to go, how to access support and how to navigate public institutions.

Trust is a foundational condition for social innovation. Initiatives depend on trust from communities, governments, funders and partners. Without trust, experimentation, collaboration and long-term commitment are difficult to sustain.

Long-term support is essential. Many social innovations only show meaningful impact after years of development. Short funding cycles, changing political priorities and unstable policy frameworks can therefore weaken promising initiatives.

Crises can create momentum for social innovation. The energy crisis, housing shortage, nitrogen crisis and COVID-19 opened space for alternative approaches and accelerated the acceptance of new models in several domains.

Social innovators often need to “fit the system” enough to influence it, while still protecting their mission. Institutionalisation can be a sign of success, but it can also create risks of co-optation or loss of transformative potential.

The report also identifies several strengths of the Dutch ecosystem. These include the availability of financial capital, the willingness of governments to engage with social innovation, the existence of policies such as social public procurement, and a strong culture of networking and collaboration. However, these strengths do not automatically translate into accessible and effective support for all social innovators.

Based on the findings, the report formulates important implications for the Dutch National Competence Centre for Social Innovation. The NCC should act as a bridge-builder between innovators, governments, funders and knowledge institutions. It should help reduce fragmentation, translate between different actors and logics, support capacity building, identify gaps in the ecosystem and promote long-term strategic thinking.

The NCC should also be careful not to add new layers of bureaucracy or impose a narrow definition of social innovation. Instead, it should build on what already works, strengthen existing initiatives and support an open and inclusive process that reflects the diversity of social innovation in the Netherlands.

The study concludes that the Netherlands has many ingredients for a thriving social innovation ecosystem. However, the full potential of this ecosystem is still constrained by fragmented structures, demanding administrative environments, unstable policies and unequal access to resources.

Ultimately, the report shows that social innovation is not just a set of individual projects. It is a way of reorganising society around values such as solidarity, fairness, community and sustainability. A National Competence Centre can help these efforts become more connected, visible and impactful — if it prioritises trust, inclusivity and long-term commitment.