Which leading group is better for the social innovation

The industrial revolution leaded the rapid social change and economical dynamic around the western civilization from 18 to 19C. In the period, many European countries adopted the new technologies and ideas from the Great Britain and developed new economical structure by their own speciality such as a geographical position, climate and political situation.  

At this stage, one of interesting points of this period is that leading group of revolution was varied too. For example, the leading group of Great Britain were the capitalist and merchant class because these class had enough asset to build new factories. However, German case was different in that the german bank was leading this revolution since they had enough money instead of merchant class. Nevertheless, Russia's industrial revolution was quite special because the government could only lead this change acceding to 'Kicking Away the Ladder' by Ha-Joon Chang. 

Like industrial revolution cases, the leading group of social innovation are different around the world because of the difference of social and cultural background. Specially, in western side, civil society has taken the very important role instead of the government because the problem they has faced is given after recognizing the government's incompetence. 

However, for developing countries, the government has taken the leading role for the social innovation many times. For example, the Brazil government is doing really great job to adopt many good social innovative ideas from other countries and customize these ideas. As a result, the economy of Brazil is getting significantly better and the degree of happiness of Brazilians also too. 

Here is another case, In South Korea, the mayor of capital city : Seoul has changed the situation of city people's life totally. Before becoming the mayor, he was the leader of the social movement and civil society and learned about many great successful cases from outside of Korea. And then, he has adopted this ideas aggressively with new technology based on a great IT infra. As result, if someone has a problem like having a broken street ramp near by their home, he can tweet this problem to the mayor directly and the mayor retweet this problem to the officer who is in charge. After little while, the someone who argued about this problem would receive the notice about fixing the problem. 

Here is pros and cons. When the government has the right motivation and purpose, people could see more a fast result and wide effect because the government has abundant resources than civil side. However, this kinds of cases are very rare, so many time, the government lose the focus to solve problems and concentrates on the maintain their organization by a bureacratism. As result, it's hard to make a decision which leader is better.

References :

http://www.amazon.com/Kicking-Away-Ladder-Development-Perspective/dp/1843310279/ref=la_B001HOFPKS_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381216953&sr=1-3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_In%C3%A1cio_Lula_da_Silva

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Won-soon