ZoekresultatenZoekresultaten
Volg ons op
Volg ons op
Types
0Instelling
26Bestandstype
9Taal
5Publicatiejaar
12Thema's
14Producttype
14Publicaties met bestand / URL
2Projectstatus
3The 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
Municipalities collaborate with citizens to find locally adapted ways to deal with the energy transition. Industry clusters work together with regional governments and knowledge institutions to develop and test new sustainable materials. Universities co-create with students and industry to find a more practice-oriented and experimental manner of learning. Nowadays everyone is developing environments to innovate and collaborate with diverse actors to face challenges that have outgrown the potential of just one group of actors tackling them. Most of these experimental environments and even the projects running in them use the term ‘Living Lab’ to describe themselves. Where does this popular approach come from and how did it develop in practice? How do different sorts of real-life labs relate to each other? And in what directions could particularly designers and applied design research help to develop experimental environments further? These are some questions the following chapter will unpack to provide an overview of the dynamic landscape of Living Labs and other experimental environments. We will do this based on a review of the international literature on Living Labs and on our own experience as practice researchers in this field in the Netherlands.
DOCUMENT
Experimental learning and innovation environments, such as living labs, field labs, and urban innovation labs, are increasingly used to connect multistakeholders in envisioning, creating, experimenting, learning, and trying out novel responses to diverse societal challenges. With designers facilitating lab processes and/or testing artifacts together with users, the design discipline plays an important role in these labs.
DOCUMENT
Due to their unique mindset and skills, designers are particularly apt to facilitate transformation processes in Living Labs, especially those that have social innovation as a goal. However, existing literature geared to the practice field runs short when designers interested in taking on such facilitation roles search for concrete orientation on how to best tackle that challenge.
DOCUMENT
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
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. Our
analysis 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 main results from the EIT UM report on the urban mobility living labs
DOCUMENT
Presentation of the EIT UM living labs study and the urban living lab Breda case.
DOCUMENT
We are pleased to present this Book of Proceedings following the international conference “Innovating Health & Daily Life through Living Labs”, co-organised by the Dutch Empathic Environment Living Labs (DEEL Academy) and the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). The two-day event took place in May 2025 in Başakşehir, Istanbul, and brought together over 100 participants from 14 countries, including researchers, designers, policy makers, healthcare professionals, and Living Lab practitioners. The conference explored how health and wellbeing can be reimagined through spatial, technological, and social innovation, grounded in inclusive and participatory practices. This volume features 41 scholarly contributions—27 peer-reviewed full papers and 14 extended abstracts—from authors representing 17 countries. Topics range from co-creation and care ethics to AI in healthcare, empathic technologies, and healthy living environments. Three key themes emerged throughout the conference: Health as a systemic phenomenon: Health was positioned not only as a biomedical issue, but as deeply embedded in our physical, social, and digital environments. Co-creation as a foundational principle: Participation was treated not as an add-on, but as a structural and ethical basis for innovation, with emphasis on inclusion, trust, and shared authorship. Empathic technologies: Smart systems were valued not for their novelty, but for their ability to quietly support autonomy, dignity, and care. Hosted by the Başakşehir Living Lab and supported by local government and partners, the conference highlighted Living Labs as essential infrastructures for systemic change. The contributions in this book reflect a shared commitment to real-world complexity, showing that innovation is not only technical, but also cultural, emotional, and ethical. We thank all authors, reviewers, speakers, organisers, and partners for making this event possible. We hope this book will serve both as a record of what was shared and as a catalyst for what’s to come.
DOCUMENT
