scholarly journals Applying an RRI Filter in Key Learning on Urban Living Labs’ Performance

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (14) ◽  
pp. 3833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Van Geenhuizen
Keyword(s):  
Power Distribution ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Urban Setting ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
Learning Framework ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Practical Implications

Urban living labs is a practical methodology in improving sustainability in cities by facilitating collaborative learning and innovation in a real-life environment, thereby mainly responding to the needs of users (citizens). The paper aims to filter a list of key learnings on urban living labs through the lens of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). One of the motivations is that key learnings on urban living labs are mainly derived from means-goal effectiveness (MGE) thinking while the urban setting calls for a broader perspective due to complexity and tension from the multi-actor, multifunctional, and multi-scalar character of cities. The filtering reveals almost 40 learnings as ‘overlap’ and ‘exclusive for MGE’. Importantly, five learnings are identified as specific for RRI and potentially enriching living lab methodology: ethical and normative principles like health, safety, security, and equality between societal groups, and a wider distribution of benefits and risks of living lab outcomes, in particular, contradictory sustainability issues. The RRI filtering causes three practical implications: coping with uneven power distribution between stakeholders, limited feasibility of applying the comprehensive learning framework, and challenges of overarching platform structures enabling to better incorporate RRI concerns in living lab methodology. The findings as presented in an adapted list are new, as RRI values and concerns have seldom been applied to practical innovation and have never been explicitly applied to urban living labs’ performance beyond the borders of effectiveness thinking.

Living Labs and Urban Smartness

2015 ◽  
pp. 98-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grazia Concilio ◽  
Francesco Molinari
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Urban Governance ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
City Life ◽  
Life Conditions ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Governance Models ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

Urban Living Labs are socio-digital innovation environments in realistic city life conditions based on multi-stakeholder partnerships that effectively involve citizens in the co-creation and co-production of new or reformed public services and infrastructures. This chapter explores the growing phenomenon of Urban Living Labs and analyses the nature of related innovations in the perspective of ‘City Smartness' – a mantra for local governments worldwide which are having to address increasingly complex problems with fast diminishing financial resources. It goes on to briefly overview the urban governance models emerging in such environments and finally focuses on the challenges posed by these models as result of integration between the ‘technology push' Smart City vision and the ‘human pull' Urban Living Lab concept and approach.

Futures of science with and for society: towards transformative policy orientations

foresight ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 276-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen van Oost ◽  
Stefan Kuhlmann ◽  
Gonzalo Ordóñez-Matamoros ◽  
Peter Stegmaier
Keyword(s):  
Policy Implications ◽  
Future Scenarios ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Strategic Intelligence ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Analytical Step ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Strategic Policies ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose How to derive policy implications from five future scenarios of transformed research and innovation (R&I) systems? This paper analyzes methodological and content issues of five future scenarios of transformed R&I systems. The aim of this paper is to provide an outlook on strategic policies capable of facilitating or moderating these transformative changes in R&I practices is discussed in light of overarching intentions to foster “responsible” ambitions (in Europe and beyond, discussed as responsible research and innovation, RRI). Design/methodology/approach The paper elaborates a four-step methodology to assess the scenario’s policy implications: first, by articulating the scenario implications for six core dimensions of R&I systems; second, an RRI assessment framework is developed to assess in each scenario opportunities and limitations for transforming R&I systems towards responsibility goals; the third involves a cross-scenario analysis of similarities and differences between the scenarios, allowing the identification of robust policy options that make sense in more than one scenario. The last analytical step includes again the richness of the individual scenario assessments aiming to provide a broader outlook on transformative policy orientations. Findings The paper concludes with outlining the contours of a future-responsible R&I system together with some suggestions for transformative policy orientations that aim to govern the R&I system towards such a future, as a source of inspiration and reflection. Research limitations/implications The analysis is based on five future scenarios that do not systematically cover future developments external to the R&I system. Practical Implications An outlook of strategic policies capable of facilitating or moderating these transformative changes in R&I practices is discussed in light of the overarching European Union goal of encouraging the performance of RRI. Originality/value This paper provides inspirational anticipatory strategic intelligence for fostering the responsible ambitions of research with and for society.

scholarly journals Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-207
Author(s):  
Darren Sharp ◽  
Rob Raven
Keyword(s):  
Urban Planning ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Urban Environments ◽  
Urban Transformation ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
Net Zero ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Empirical Illustration

Urban living labs have emerged as spatially embedded arenas for governing urban transformation, where heterogenous actor configurations experiment with new practices, institutions, and infrastructures. This article observes a nascent shift towards experimentation at the precinct scale and responds to a need to further investigate relevant processes in urban experimentation at this scale, and identifies particular challenges for urban planning. We tentatively conceptualise precincts as spatially bounded urban environments loosely delineated by a particular combination of social or economic activity. Our methodology involves an interpretive systematic literature review of urban experimentation and urban living labs at precinct scale, along with an empirical illustration of the Net Zero Initiative at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, which is operationalising its main campus into a living lab focussed on precinct-scale decarbonisation. We identify four processual categories relevant to precinct-scale experimentation: embedding, framing, governing, and learning. We use the empirical illustration to discuss the relevance of these processes, refine findings from the literature review and conclude with a discussion on the implications of our article for future scholarship on urban planning by experiment at precinct scale.

PP89 Living Lab Concept: An Innovation Hub For Elderly Residential Care

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
Ala Szczepura ◽  
Mark Collinson ◽  
Louise Moody ◽  
Yanguo Jing ◽  
Gill Ward ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Residential Care ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Technology Selection ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
Sensor Data ◽  
Sheltered Housing ◽  
Horizon Scanning ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs

Introduction:Many countries face the challenge of an aging population. Development of suitable technologies to support frail elderly living in care homes, sheltered housing or at home remains a concern. Technology evaluation in real-life conditions is often lacking, and randomized controlled trials of ‘pre-designed’ technologies are expensive and fail to deliver. A novel alternative would be ‘living labs’-real-life test and experimentation environments where users and producers co-create innovations and large-scale data can be collected.Methods:The goal of the living labs and Data Driven Research and Innovation (DDRI) Programme is to use data driven analytics and insights to support technology development for independent living, healthy aging and more cost-effective care. This involves a cluster of long-term residential care facilities providing 24/7 living lab settings, linked to an embedded innovation hub. DDRI also encompasses private vehicles (e.g. sensors in cars) to enable elderly to drive safely for longer. Collaborations have been established with Universities in England, Scotland and Ireland and with international industry partners.Results:Several projects are underway: (i) develop machine learning algorithm from non-intrusive sensor data to build a well-being representation for individual residents/citizens; (ii) evaluate innovative interventions for good sleep environment and nutritional support; and (iii) establish ethics framework to ensure that needs of residents, families and staff are embedded in design, communication, and evaluation of future DDRI projects. In addition, fifteen interdisciplinary doctoral fellowships are in place, six universities are working closely with individual living lab settings, and an innovation hub has been established in one care home for horizon-scanning and strategic technology selection and implementation.Conclusions:Over the next five years, a national network of 20 residential living labs with over 1,500 participants will be established. Generation of new user-led technologies, blueprints for capture of individual data at significant scale, and ethical and organizational guidelines will be developed. Intelligent mobility via data capture/feedback in vehicles will be established.

scholarly journals Teaching university students co-creation and living lab methodologies through experiential learning activities and preparing them for RRI

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 146045822199120
Author(s):  
Evdokimos I Konstantinidis ◽  
Despoina Petsani ◽  
Panagiotis D Bamidis
Keyword(s):  
Experiential Learning ◽  
University Students ◽  
End Users ◽  
Learning Activities ◽  
User Centered Design ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Innovation Approach

During the last decade, the living lab and co-creation concepts have started being blended with the Responsible Research and Innovation approach, aiming to evaluate potential societal anticipations toward fostering an inclusive RRI behavior. Teaching co-creation concept and living lab methodologies to university students has started been considered as valuable for future researchers along with the demand of companies and public sectors which turn toward user-center techniques for inspiration to develop innovative and services. To this end, the scientific publications presenting work on teaching co-creation and living lab methodologies are not so many while there are no published research studies on experiential learning activities for teaching co-creation and living lab approaches to university students. This study presents a course based on living labs and co-creation methodologies through experiential learning activities, consisted of four different lectures and an open event. The study involves stakeholders from the academia, the citizens, and the public sector. The results show that lectures with the participation of end-users were the most enjoyable. Furthermore, students thought that they learned the most when they first met the end-users. This lecture was perceived as a successful way to gain methodical knowledge for user-centered design and software development.

scholarly journals Barriers to the Adoption of Urban Living Labs for NBS Implementation: A Systemic Perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 13276
Author(s):  
Shahryar Sarabi ◽  
Qi Han ◽  
A. Georges L. Romme ◽  
Bauke de Vries ◽  
Rianne Valkenburg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Structural Model ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Structural Modelling ◽  
Institutional Barriers ◽  
Interpretive Structural Modelling ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
Safe Environment ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Knowledge Brokers ◽  
Systemic Understanding

Urban Living Labs (ULLs) are widely believed to provide a safe environment for experimentation, co-creation and evaluation of innovations in real-life settings. A growing number of cities have been adopting ULLs to co-create and test Nature-Based Solutions (NBS). However, many of these cities have been facing major barriers in trying to adopt the ULL approach for implementing NBS. In this study, we seek to identify these barriers and provide a systemic understanding. Barriers are identified by means of workshops and interviews. Subsequently, interpretive structural modelling serves to identify the interdependencies among the barriers, resulting in a structural model of barriers in adopting ULLs for NBS. Our results show that political and institutional barriers are significantly limiting the adoption of ULLs. Moreover, knowledge brokers and other intermediaries, as well as cross-sectoral collaboration, play a key role in getting ULLs adopted. The findings from this study can help cities to develop strategies that overcome the main barriers for ULL adoption in the context of nature-based solutions.

scholarly journals A Methodology for Designing Smart Urban Living Labs from the University for the Cities of the Future

Sensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (20) ◽  
pp. 6712
Author(s):  
Nadhiely Martínez-Bello ◽  
Mónica José Cruz-Prieto ◽  
David Güemes-Castorena ◽  
Alberto Mendoza-Domínguez
Keyword(s):  
Solar Energy ◽  
Residual Water ◽  
Research Groups ◽  
High Demand ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Smart Living ◽  
The University

Cities have high demand and limited availability of water and energy, so it is necessary to have adequate technologies to make efficient use of these resources and to be able to generate them. This research focuses on developing and executing a methodology for an urban living lab vocation identification for a new water and energy self-sufficient university building. The methods employed were constructing a technological roadmap to identify global trends and select the technologies and practices to be implemented in the building. Among the chosen technologies were those for capturing and using rain and residual water, the generation of solar energy, and water and energy generation and consumption monitoring. This building works as a living laboratory since the operation and monitoring generate knowledge and innovation through students and research groups that develop projects. The insights gained from this study may help other efforts to avoid pitfalls and better design smart living labs and off-grid buildings.

Living Labs and Urban Smartness

2020 ◽  
pp. 274-287
Author(s):  
Grazia Concilio ◽  
Francesco Molinari
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Urban Governance ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
City Life ◽  
Life Conditions ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Governance Models ◽  
Stakeholder Partnerships ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

Urban Living Labs are socio-digital innovation environments in realistic city life conditions based on multi-stakeholder partnerships that effectively involve citizens in the co-creation and co-production of new or reformed public services and infrastructures. This chapter explores the growing phenomenon of Urban Living Labs and analyses the nature of related innovations in the perspective of ‘City Smartness' – a mantra for local governments worldwide which are having to address increasingly complex problems with fast diminishing financial resources. It goes on to briefly overview the urban governance models emerging in such environments and finally focuses on the challenges posed by these models as result of integration between the ‘technology push' Smart City vision and the ‘human pull' Urban Living Lab concept and approach.

scholarly journals Living Labs—A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 188
Author(s):  
Gerd Lupp ◽  
Aude Zingraff-Hamed ◽  
Josh J. Huang ◽  
Amy Oen ◽  
Stephan Pauleit
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
River Restoration ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Mountain Forest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Award Winning ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
Living Labs

Living Labs are recognized as a progressive form to foster innovation and the strengthening of collaborative planning. The concept has received strong attention by the European Union (EU) research and innovation agendas recently. This contribution investigates how a Living Lab approach could be used for the design and implementation of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS). NBS are gaining acceptance as a more sustainable solution for reducing the exposure to natural hazards and vulnerability to events, such as increased flooding in changing climate. However, a lack of collaborative approaches hinders their broader implementation. A literature review on the theoretical aspects of the Living Labs concept in the context of NBS is conducted, and we compare the theoretical findings with practices that were observed by case studies implementing NBS in a collaborative manner. The Isar-Plan River Restoration in Munich, Germany, and the Mountain Forest Initiative (Bergwaldoffensive). Both of the case studies have already started well before the concept of Living Labs gained wider popularity. Both award-winning cases are recognized good practice for their exemplary in-depth stakeholder involvement. The paper discusses the concepts and approaches of Living Labs and reflects on how it can serve and support in-depth participatory stakeholder involvement.

scholarly journals Community Living Lab as a Collaborative Innovation Environment

10.28945/3339 ◽  
2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacobus van der Walt ◽  
Albertus Buitendag ◽  
Jannie Zaaiman ◽  
J. C. Jansen van Vuuren
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
South African ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Community Living ◽  
South African Context ◽  
Living Lab ◽  
African Context ◽  
Living Labs

A Living Lab is a new way to deal with community-driven innovation in real-life contexts. The Living Lab concept is fuelled by knowledge sharing, collaboration and experimenting in open real environments. This research explores the sustainable development of community Living Labs within a South African context. The members of rural communities need sustainable development support in order to create jobs and alleviate poverty. In order to do so they need an open multidisciplinary research and systems thinking support environment which is facilitated in the Living Lab environment. The Living Lab approach provides its user group with an opportunity to develop a much deeper understanding of how the various components in their functional environment operate and interrelate. In the research community the Living Lab concept seems to be gaining increasing acceptance as a way to deal with innovation and to get insight into the innovation process. Several Living Labs are currently connected in a network of Living Labs, both in Europe and in South Africa aiming to share best practices and lessons learned. Creating an innovative software based management model for Living Labs for the greater South African region is also part of the research objectives. This paper presents two interrelated frameworks for the establishment of a Living Lab within a South African context. The paper also highlights the important role of holistic Systems thinking in a Living Lab environment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document