Can do-it-yourself laboratories open up the science, technology, and innovation research system to civil society?

Lhoste, Évelyne

doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120226

Cited by 19 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Behind this generic concept, formal CIS can take different configurations. Some places can be equipped with technical or technological tools, like FabLabs or makerspaces, for instance (Lhoste, 2020), whilst others can provide specific internal workspace for enhancing collaboration, creativity and change (Capron et al, 2021; Cohendet et al, 2021; Sgourev, 2013). Furthermore, some can be dematerialized, with ‘proximate’ interactions taking place in virtual space on the Internet (Elia et al, 2020; Marchi et al, 2011).…”

Section: Collaborative Innovation Spaces: Prior Literature and Propos...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These spaces allow individuals to ‘gather, socialise and share/produce knowledge‐by‐doing with a variety of tools’ (Lhoste, 2020): they are places where creative, experimental, prototyping and innovation activities (are expected to) take place (Moultrie et al, 2007). Such spaces can take different forms, either within the organization, corresponding to corporate innovation labs (Lhoste, 2020) and corporate co‐working spaces (Bouncken et al, 2022), or in external environments, such as FabLabs (Suire, 2019) and in some cases coworking spaces (Berbegal‐Mirabent, 2021; Capdevila, 2019; Howell, 2022). They can also be on‐line, taking the form of virtual communities (Elia et al, 2020; Yang et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Which types of firm use collaborative innovative spaces?

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative innovation spaces (CIS) can bring together multiple actors to enhance creativity, collaboration and knowledge exchange, sometimes leading to innovation. In this paper, we suggest that CIS can be categorized into three broad types (internal to the firm, external and virtual) and that each type is related to innovation processes, knowledge‐sourcing and geographic context in specific ways. Our results, based on an original firm‐level survey, reveal that there is heterogeneity with respect to firm attributes and innovation activities associated with different types of CIS. In particular, whilst innovation is associated with the use of CIS in general, radical and technological innovations are more strongly associated with internal CIS, whereas smaller firms tend to use virtual CIS. External CIS, whilst not associated with technological innovation, are associated with high‐tech firms. CIS use does not vary across geographic context. These results emphasize the importance of in‐person, internal, CIS for radical and technological innovation and the need to distinguish between different types of CIS in order to understand how each is associated with different types of innovation, knowledge‐sourcing and firm.

show abstract

Section: Collaborative Innovation Spaces: Prior Literature and Propos...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which types of firm use collaborative innovative spaces?

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The empowerment of citizens regarding FAIR (meta)data knowledge and competences is also important for steering interest in the general public to take up new professions, such as energy data stewards and data analysts. Lhoste [37] investigates possibilities of engaging civil society in R&D with the help of specifically tailored research systems. Dunnett et al [38] is a best practice on harmonizing data for solar and wind farm locations by sourcing information from the collaborative OpenStreetMap project.…”

Section: Gaps For Users Of Energy (Meta)datamentioning

confidence: 99%

FAIR Metadata Standards for Low Carbon Energy Research—A Review of Practices and How to Advance

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The principles of Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability (FAIR) have been put forward to guide optimal sharing of data. The potential for industrial and social innovation is vast. Domain-specific metadata standards are crucial in this context, but are widely missing in the energy sector. This report provides a collaborative response from the low carbon energy research community for addressing the necessity of advancing FAIR metadata standards. We review and test existing metadata practices in the domain based on a series of community workshops. We reflect the perspectives of energy data stakeholders. The outcome is reported in terms of challenges and elicits recommendations for advancing FAIR metadata standards in the energy domain across a broad spectrum of stakeholders.

show abstract

“…Today, DiY labs are open to tinkering and experimentation among amateurs and novices ), but they were first founded by professional scientists to counter the rigid and bureaucratic systems that surround mainstream research and innovation (Lhoste 2020). In these labs, they could produce technological knowledge more freely without the stringent controls and peer evaluation that fraught conventional research practices in academic settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…DiY labs are therefore characterised by civic technoscience and participatory research, serving as incubators for social, democratised, and frugal innovation (Burnside et al 2019;Rajan 2021). They demystify science, encourage interdisciplinary collaborations at the grassroots, and provide a springboard for diverse forms of knowledge production that straddle the boundaries between academic, practitioner and citizen research (Lhoste 2020;.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking stock and charting the future: the management and implications of DIY laboratories for innovation and society

Liedong

Sarpong

2021

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

DiY science, as a field of research and practice, has grown rapidly over the past few decades. However, a significant portion of the DiY corpus focuses on technical issues in engineering and health disciplines, which limits our knowledge about the administration of DiY innovation and other related topics. To further advance the field, this special issue examines the management and implications of DiY laboratories for innovation and society. It contributes to a better understanding of the contextual and individual antecedents, operations, governance, business models, and strategies of DiY labs. The chosen papers, representing a mix of review, conceptual, and qualitative methodologies from across Africa, Asia, and Europe, provide different approaches and views that extend the current boundaries of extant knowledge regarding DiY labs and science. This special issue also highlights what remains to be pursued and outlines some interesting future research directions.

show abstract

Can do-it-yourself laboratories open up the science, technology, and innovation research system to civil society?

Cited by 19 publications

References 22 publications

Which types of firm use collaborative innovative spaces?

Which types of firm use collaborative innovative spaces?

FAIR Metadata Standards for Low Carbon Energy Research—A Review of Practices and How to Advance

Taking stock and charting the future: the management and implications of DIY laboratories for innovation and society

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About