The Defining Characteristics of Urban Living Labs

Steen, Kris; Bueren, Ellen van

doi:10.22215/timreview/1088

Cited by 161 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

135

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mika Westerlund, Seppo Leminen, and Mervi Rajahonka dispersed, and there is not one commonly accepted definition of "living lab". This issue is highlighted by Steen and van Bueren (2017), who reviewed over 30 articles on living labs published in the TIM Review in order to compare how different authors have defined living labs, and by the fact that the ENoLL website actually provides three definitions for living labs (enoll.org/ about-us/). According to ENoLL's primary definition, living labs are "user-centred, open innovation ecosystems based on systematic user co-creation approach, integrating research and innovation processes in real life communities and settings".…”

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Topic 7: Living lab Finally, the seventh topic examines the living lab itself to understand what living labs and their defining characteristics are. The subtopics are focused on providing taxonomies, typologies, and categorizations: 1) the characteristics of living labs (e.g., Steen & van Bueren, 2017), 2) living labs as a type of user innovation methodology (e.g., Almirall et al, 2012), 3) living labs as open innovation networks (e.g., Leminen et al, 2012), 4) categorization of innovation tools in living labs (e.g., , and 5) classification of the environment in living labs (e.g., Bergvall-Kåreborn et al, 2015). Characteristics of living labs can be used to categorize true living labs from improperly labelled living labs.…”

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, interesting research opportunities are arising as some living labs that have been operating for a long time are ending their operations, merging into new forms of collaborative innovation (cf. Claudel, 2018;Steen & van Bueren, 2017), or establishing financial mechanisms to support their operations after the initial funding dries out.…”

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Along with seven special issues (2012, 2013a, 2013b, 2015, 2016, 2017a, 2017b) and numerous additional articles on living labs in other issues, "living labs" has been a prominent theme in the TIM Review (McPhee et al, 2017a). Those contributions have been of relevance to scholars and practitioners of collaborative innovation, and the journal has played a considerable role in the transformative debate on living labs (Steen & van Bueren, 2017). That said, after all these years, the literature still remains sparse in terms of guidance on how to establish a living lab and how to run and manage it to create value for its stakeholders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Topic Modelling Analysis of Living Labs Research

Westerlund¹,

Leminen²,

Rajahonka³

2018

TIM Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Topic Modelling Analysis Of Living Labs Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Topic Modelling Analysis of Living Labs Research

Westerlund¹,

Leminen²,

Rajahonka³

2018

TIM Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The Urban Living Lab is a new cooperation and participatory model to promote urban regeneration, based on a systematic user co-creation approach in public-private-people partnerships, focused on solving a particular problem, through circular actions aimed at implementing sustainable technologies and processes in real-life communities and settings [10], [11]. This model involves the implementation of small-scale tests, usually in a limited urban area, their uptake across the city and their replicability in other cities.…”

Section: Behind the Concept Of "Cultural Heritage"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultural Heritage as a Driver for Urban Regeneration: Comparing Two Processes

Boeri

Bortoli

Longo

2018

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the international research-action activities conducted by a team from the University of Bologna, Italy, and on a methodological approach applied to the city, understood as heritage and common good. The premise establishes Cultural Heritage as the main field of research-action, which is not intended as a static presence in the city, but, at best, should be constantly updated with the actions of transformation of the city. The cultural model is based on a continuous effort to recognize the city and its transformations as heritage, combining conservation and innovation in a seamless stream and permanently involving not only heritage specialists but also all actors that are involved in urban transformation, with varying degrees of responsibility and awareness. Two cities are considered as references and compared with each other to study and test this approach: Bogotá and Bologna, with, respectively, two important historical areas, Carrera Séptima and Zamboni district. The focus is on the role that the cultural heritage, material and immaterial plays in the current urban landscape and on its potential to be a driver for regeneration in the degraded urban fabric. Both areas have been crucial to urban development and to the expression of social needs by the population, becoming a symbol of collective identity, for better or worse. Since the first half of the 20th century, Bogotá has experienced an exponential urban growth process, triggering wearing dynamics that have compromised the urban architectural heritage preservation of the city and led to progressive historical city center deterioration. Bologna district, on the other hand, hosts the oldest university in the western part of the world, and having such a strong function in a compact city center reality has caused coexistence and social problems, as well as integration needs, among the different users. The two historical realities are studied using a comparative methodology, one as a typical European city and the other as a Latin American megalopolis. In this light, the term "street" is not limited to the description of the physical space, but is associated with the whole system of connections and influences that they exert on their own area.

show abstract

Contextualizing and generalizing drivers and barriers of urban living labs for climate resilience

Quadros Aniche,

Edelenbos,

Gianoli

et al. 2024

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban Living Labs are open innovation ecosystems that integrate research and innovation activities within urban communities. However, while solutions co‐created and tested in the Urban Living Labs must be contextualized and tailored to each city's uniqueness, broader impact requires generalization and systematic replication across geographical, institutional, and sectoral boundaries. This article examines nine Living Labs in European coastal cities, identifying several barriers and drivers for mainstreaming and upscaling solutions to increase climate resilience through the Living Lab Integrative Process. Our analysis focuses on three main categories. First, social and cultural aspects highlighted include stakeholder engagement and awareness, communication, and dissemination. Second, we assess institutional and political aspects, such as silos, bureaucracy, and resources. Last, we investigate technical factors as knowledge and experience, technical and internal capacity, data availability and accessibility, climate‐related policies and actions, and long‐term perspective. The results suggest that while some barriers and drivers are common across the cases, providing generalizable patterns, there are also specific differences requiring tailored solutions at the local scale. Nonetheless, the diversity in drivers indicates the potential for sharing knowledge across cases to translate, embed, and scale solutions, enhancing the transition toward climate resilience. Learning and innovation in real‐life contexts are fundamental in the Living Lab approach, and our findings demonstrate that cross‐case learning can enhance an iterative process of contextualizing and generalizing innovative climate solutions.

show abstract

The Defining Characteristics of Urban Living Labs

Cited by 161 publications

References 36 publications

A Topic Modelling Analysis of Living Labs Research

A Topic Modelling Analysis of Living Labs Research

Cultural Heritage as a Driver for Urban Regeneration: Comparing Two Processes

Contextualizing and generalizing drivers and barriers of urban living labs for climate resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About