The workshop aims to understand how a living lab network structures contribute to system innovation. Living labs as system innovation initiatives can substantially alter established network structures. Moreover, structures can undergo alterations through subtle interventions, with impact on the overall outcomes of living labs. To understand how such change occurs, we develop a multilevel network perspective to study collaborations toward system innovation. We take this perspective to help understand living lab dynamics, drawing on innovative examples and taking into consideration the multilayered structures that the collaboration comprises.
MULTIFILE
Living labs are complex multi-stakeholder collaborations that often employ a usercentred and design-driven methodology to foster innovation. Conventional management tools fall short in evaluating them. However, some methods and tools dedicated to living labs' special characteristics and goals have already been developed. Most of them are still in their testing phase. Those tools are not easily accessible and can only be found in extensive research reports, which are difficult to dissect. Therefore, this paper reviews seven evaluation methods and tools specially developed for living labs. Each section of this paper is structured in the following manner: tool’s introduction (1), who uses the tool (2), and how it should be used (3). While the first set of tools, namely “ENoLL 20 Indicators”, “SISCODE Self-assessment”, and “SCIROCCO Exchange Tool” assess a living lab as an organisation and are diving deeper into the organisational activities and the complex context, the second set of methods and tools, “FormIT” and “Living Lab Markers”, evaluate living labs’ methodologies: the process they use to come to innovations. The paper's final section presents “CheRRIes Monitoring and Evaluation Tool” and “TALIA Indicator for Benchmarking Service for Regions”, which assess the regional impact made by living labs. As every living lab is different regarding its maturity (as an organisation and in its methodology) and the scope of impact it wants to make, the most crucial decision when evaluating is to determine the focus of the assessment. This overview allows for a first orientation on worked-out methods and on possible indicators to use. It also concludes that the existing tools are quite managerial in their method and aesthetics and calls for designers and social scientists to develop more playful, engaging and (possibly) learning-oriented tools to evaluate living labs in the future. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/overdiek12345/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/mari-genova-17a727196/?originalSubdomain=nl
DOCUMENT
“Dit project/onderzoek/living lab/leer- en innovatienetwerk is medegefinancierd door het Centre of Expertise Preventie in Zorg en Welzijn” Een blauwdruk voor een living lab collectieve belangenbehartiging is enigszins paradoxaal. Het wekt al snel de indruk dat er een pasklaar antwoord ligt dat in elke situatie in praktijk gebracht kan worden en enkel uitgevoerd hoeft of dient te worden. Maar een living lab is, zoals het begrip al suggereert, levendig van aard. Het is inherent aan een living lab dat er ruimte blijft bestaan om te onderzoeken en nieuwe ideeën te vormen over de aard van het lab zelf, zonder vast te zitten in een blauwdruk. Daarom presenteren we hier een aantal uitgangspunten en ideeën die meegenomen kunnen worden om een living lab collectieve belangenbehartiging vorm en inhoud te geven.
DOCUMENT
Presentation of the main results from the EIT UM report on the urban mobility living labs
DOCUMENT
This paper analyses co-creation in urban living labs through a multi-level network perspective on system innovation. We draw on the case House of Skills, a large, multi-stakeholder living lab aimed at developing a ‘skills-based’ approach towards labour market innovation within the Amsterdam Metropolitan Region. Ouranalysis helps understand stakeholder dynamics towards system innovation, drawing on an innovative living lab example and taking into consideration the multi-layered structures that comprise the collaboration. Our conceptual framework provides an important theoretical contribution to innovation studies and offers a practical repertoire that can help practitioners improve co-creation of shared value in living labs, towards orchestrating flexible structures that strengthen the impact of their initiatives.
LINK
Presentation of the EIT UM living labs study and the urban living lab Breda case.
DOCUMENT
This literature review applies Wenger’s community of practice framework as a theoretical lens to generate insight about the complex collaborative processes of living labs. The authors explore this model with insights from the literature on labs and then set out to understand higher educational living labs. The findings show that current research on lab practices is limited, the field is scattered, and there is little common perspective across disciplines. The authors advocate for more research on the actual social processes. Only then can living labs hold their promise of integrating learning and innovation in higher education.
DOCUMENT
The paper discusses the growing importance of urban freight research given the increasing urban population trends. The complexity of urban freight systems means that it is essential for the public and private sectors to work together - one way to achieve this has been through freight partnerships. A short review of freight partnerships highlights the way in which they have fostered mutual understanding among urban freight stakeholders. The literature on shared situational awareness (SSA) and joint knowledge production (JKP) has been adapted to position freight partnerships and to further develop and link these partnerships to the concept of a living laboratory concerned with urban freight transport. This novel application of the living lab concept is introduced. Next, the first phases of a city logistics living lab brought in practice in Rotterdam are shortly mentioned. The living lab concept fits the complexities of the urban freight system well and has been a cornerstone of a recently started major freight project in the EU (CITYLAB). © 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
MULTIFILE
Experimental Learning and Innovation Environments, such as Living Labs, Field Labs, and Urban Innovation Labs, are increasingly used to connect multi-stakeholders in envisioning, creating, experimenting, learning, and trying out novel responses to diverse societal challenges. With designers facilitating the co-creation processes that take place in these labs, the design discipline plays an important role in these experimental environments. Applied Design Research in Living Labs and other Experimental Learning and Innovation Environments combines a focus on Experimental Learning and Innovation Environments (or Living Labs) with a focus on Applied Design Research. It offers an interdisciplinary perspective by bringing together diverse stakeholders from different disciplines. The book will adopt an interdisciplinary perspective, integrating insights from design, innovation, sociology, technology, and other relevant fields. It showcases real-world examples and case studies of successful Applied Design Research in Living Labs and focuses on design dilemmas that emerge while working in these Experimental Learning and Innovation Environments. The book explores the role of various stakeholders, including the roles that may play out during the development of Experimental Learning and Innovation Environments, and goes on to discuss the balance between fixed or fluid roles of these stakeholders and the polarity between working within one specific discipline versus working with various expertise or disciplines. Designers, government representatives, and researchers who apply a living lab approach to solve multi-stakeholder challenges in various fields by applying Urban Innovation Labs, Energy Living Labs, Mobility Living Labs, Health Living Labs, Education Living Labs, or Social Living Labs will find this book of interest.
LINK
Citizens and urban policy makers are experimenting with collaborative ways to tackle wicked urban issues, such as today’s sustainability challenges. In this article, we consider one particular way of collaboration in an experimental setting: Urban Living Labs (ULLs). ULLs are understood as spatially embedded sites for the co-creation of knowledge and solutions by conducting local experiments. As such, ULLs are supposed to offer an arena for reflexive, adaptive, and multi-actor learning environments, where new practices of self-organization and novel (infra-) structures can be tested within their real-world context. Yet, it remains understudied how the co-creation of knowledge and practices actually takes place within ULLs, and how co-creation unfolds their impacts. Hence, this paper focuses on co-creation dynamics in urban living labs, its associated learning and knowledge generation, and how these possibly contribute to urban sustainability transitions. We analyzed empirical data from a series of in-depth interviews and were actively involved with ULLs in the Rotterdam-The Hague region in the Netherlands. Our findings show five distinct types of co-creation elements that relate to specific dynamics of participation, facilitation, and organization. We conclude with a discussion on the ambivalent role of contextualized knowledge and the implications for sustainability transitions.
LINK
