×
The Human-Centricity Gap
How the world’s innovation ecosystems say they value human-centric innovation — and how far that has actually reached their day-to-day selection decisions.
A wide gap between intention and practice
The IASP community overwhelmingly believes innovation spaces should shape a more human-centric, ethical and sustainable innovation — but when it comes to the criteria that actually decide which projects and companies get selected and supported, human, societal and environmental factors still come last, behind innovativeness and market potential. The ambition is shared; the method to operationalise it is largely missing.
Who responded
A global, STP-heavy sample — 123 respondents across 49 countries (top: Italy, Brazil, France, Germany, Thailand, Canada, Spain, Sweden), spanning small and very large ecosystems.
Type of organisation
How many ventures they support / host
32% support more than 150 ventures at once — these are large, mature ecosystems, not small incubators.
The aspiration is real
Innovation spaces see human-centric innovation as part of their mission, and most are already engaged in related initiatives.
“To what extent do innovation spaces have a role in fostering ethical, responsible, human-centric innovation?”
The practice tells another story
Asked to rank the criteria that carry the real weight in their selection decisions, respondents put innovativeness and market potential first — and societal and environmental impact dead last. This is the gap, quantified.
Selection criteria — share of respondents ranking each in their top 3
User desirability / real need holds a middle position (50%), but the two explicitly human/planet criteria — societal (13%) and environmental (9%) impact — sit at the bottom.
How ethics, responsible AI & impact enter selection
Only 19% treat it as a formal criterion; 57% “informally”, 19% not at all.
The “can we support it?” → “should we support it?” shift
Only 34% say it is embedded in their methods; for most it is partial or still a narrative.
What holds them back
The barriers are cultural and structural more than technical: short-term pressure on results and a technology-push culture lead, ahead of funding and the lack of shared method and tools.
Main barriers to more human-centric innovation (average impact, 1–5)
The capability they say is missing
Asked in their own words what innovation spaces most lack to operationalise human-centricity, respondents converged — strikingly often — on the same answer: a practical way to turn human and societal needs into measurable criteria that actually shape decisions.
“The ability to translate human needs and lived experiences into measurable, co-created criteria that shape investment and programming decisions.”
— Science & technology park (one of many near-identical answers)“A sustainable business model that rewards human-centric outcomes, and a practical way to translate commercial logic into measures of desirability and long-term impact.”
— Science & technology park“A systematic way to translate human needs, behaviours and lived experience into measurable criteria that directly shape investment and programming.”
— Area of innovationLooking five years ahead, respondents expect societal and environmental impact, measurable social value, responsible AI and uniquely human skills to become decisive selection criteria — the very factors that rank last today. The direction of travel is clear; the operating method is what’s missing.
What the barometer tells us
- The will is there and near-universal: 85% see a clear role for innovation spaces in human-centric innovation.
- But intention hasn’t reached the decision: human, societal and environmental criteria rank last in real selection, and only 19% apply them formally.
- The blockers are cultural and methodological — pressure on results, technology-push habits, and a missing shared language, method and tools.
- The community itself names the fix: a practical, measurable way to turn human and societal needs into selection criteria — and expects exactly these criteria to become decisive within five years.
