From Co-Creation to Circular Cities: Exploring Living Labs in EU Governance Frameworks – A Literature Review

REPAiR will provide local and regional authorities with an innovative transdisciplinary open source Geodesign Decision Support Environment (GDSE) developed and implemented in Living Labs (LLs) context, in six metropolitan areas namely Naples, Ghent, Hamburg, Pécs, Łódź and Amsterdam. LLs are physical and virtual environments, in which public-private-people partnerships experiment an iterative method to develop innovations, that include the involvement of end users. In LLs different areas of expertise from diverse partners are needed for a good development of the activities, with the aim to meet the need of the stakeholders by innovation. The innovation concept here is used in the sense of a difference between an existing entity (a product, a policy, a service, etc.) and customers’ expectations. The elements of innovation can be technological factors, better working conditions or methods of entity delivery, etc., because to innovate means to be creative, learning from mistakes. This means also to learn and share information about what went wrong, in order to use it in upcoming phases. LLs are approaches and instruments, at the same time, to improve the innovation capabilities and competitiveness of territories. Thanks to the LL approach, policy makers can face the many socio-economic challenges of their territories, improving social inclusion. Typically useful for the interpretation of complex real life environments, LLs are recognized as users-friendly instruments and processes to promote open innovation in several European regions. In this way complex solutions are identified, tested and transformed into prototypes (Innovation Alcotra, 2013). In other words, an LL is a “user-driven open innovation ecosystem” (EC, 2009) that utilizes the fruitful participation of business, citizens and governments in the research process; this approach is helpful in order to better define the current behaviors and user patterns. Co-creation, one of the main and transversal components of an LL, is the process that produces a product or a service as a result of a cooperation between the collaboration of end-users and other stakeholders that work in the common environment of LL (Innovation Alcotra, 2013). Cities as complex systems, characterized by Urban Metabolism and increasing challenges, demand co-creation (Gemeente Rotterdam, IABR, FABRIC, JCFO, & TNO, 2014). LLs identify sustainable activities that are coherent with the territory and competitive in some ways if compared with global economies, and put them in contact with the ones that already exist in the same area. In REPAiR, Living Labs are organized in six peri-urban areas across Europe, as stated above, as decision support environments where representatives of universities, governance, corporations, local communities and, in addition, individuals make decisions that are based on their role and expertise. In this framework, design professionals, information technologists and scientists give contributions and support the decision-making process related to what to do and how to do that in each case study area. In order to make a decision that must be site specific, it is necessary to identify and compare several opportunities and alternatives that should be developed in the Peri-Urban Living Labs (PULLs), after the knowledge and evaluation of the current situation of the place. The different disciplines involved in the PULL have different methods that can interact, to imagine and select change models that work at different scales simultaneously.

Living labs can be defined as: “a physical or virtual place where partners and users from open innovation networks further develop and test innovations together” (Endedijk et al., 2024). The use of living labs as dynamic teaching tools are increasingly emerging in geosciences as they can integrate real-world challenges and collaborative learning to engage students in addressing societal issues. However, the lack of a unified definition and diverse methodologies for implementing living labs create challenges in programme development, as well as uncertainty for students about expectations and preparation. A key difficulty lies in distinguishing living labs from traditional natural sciences fieldwork while balancing societal and policy aspects to simulate realistic, interdisciplinary environments.We are developing a Living Lab course within the MSc programme Water Management for Climate Adaptation, aiming to educate students on the integration of natural sciences and governance in water management. This initiative is part of a broader educational effort linked to the newly established Delta Climate Center in Zeeland, fostering transdisciplinary learning around local water management challenges.We take a three-pronged pedagogical approach:Understanding and learning how to undertake research, including the empirical research cycle and designing a proposal Development of skills that are required to undertake a thesis during skills labs, including fieldwork, labwork, modelling and qualitative data gathering. Management of interdisciplinary projects in a real-world setting, through creation of an policy report in student teams approaching issues from different perspectives. In the development of the programme, we have run into some interesting questions including: how can these living labs be placed in a broader curriculum? What is the optimum method for assessment in a Living Lab? How can we choose the best locations for field visits or undertaking research?We are interested in hearing from others in the session about how Living Labs are perceived, challenges, suggestions or ideas from different experiences. 

The concept of living labs is presented as a framework for studying and acting in living settings such as organizations, work places, public spaces and the wider environment. Living labs have been suggested and indeed promoted as promising infrastructures for innovation. Yet, at the same time, the notion of a living lab has been criticized as being vague and superfluous. We thus ask whether the living lab concept contributes any more than the simple notion of a pilot project in a multi-stakeholder environment. This chapter presents an overview of thinking on Living Labs.

Using two local authorities (LAs) (Windhoek and Walvis Bay) in Namibia, this study problematises their negative and neutral developmental experiences with facilitating foreign direct investment (FDI) as concerning (Jauch, 2020). The absence of a normative framework for LA FDI facilitation in Namibia’s multi-level government (MLG) system creates a developmental quagmire for LAs. This study develops a normative framework for LA FDI facilitation to avert the negative and neutral developmental experiences of LAs with facilitating FDI. Using the qualitative method, this study interviewed 13 key respondents that were sampled through the purposive/judgemental technique. Data were interpreted and presented through thematic analysis. The key findings point to the development of a normative framework for LA FDI facilitation that ascends the need for 1) sufficient decentralised functions of FDI facilitation in an MLG system; 2) policy and legislative harmonisation to avert challenges of coordination and implementation in an MLG system; 3) institutional structures for an efficient MLG system at the LA level; and 4) broader legal and policy framework for efficient governance at the sub-national government (SNG) level in an MLG system. This study recommends the application of this normative framework in MLG systems to ascend LAs’ developmental role in facilitating FDI for development.

Growing numbers of tourist arrivals, in combination with community-centered tourism products, have fueled the recent debate on overtourism and a redefining of local steering processes. This has also called for the participation of residents in governance processes. One tool to utilize residents’ participation and cross-stakeholder involvement is the Living Lab (LL), which also functions as a medium for self-organization. This article tackles the research gap that exists in the combination of the LL mechanisms and destination governance (DG). Therefore, the research questions address the characteristics and mechanisms of LLs and the potential for residents’ participation. These efforts are operationalized through a systematic literature review (SLR) on LLs, which involves 40 articles. The transfer of the LL characteristics towards DG reveals that certain drivers and barriers exist when implementing the LL in the governance process, such as the combination of destination and city planning or the redefining of hierarchical structures. The SLR recommendations for future research are based on the interface of LL and DG.

Cooperative Mentorship: Negotiating Social Media Use within the Family

Living lab is becoming a popular concept to design integrated solutions through the integration of users in the each stages of an innovation process. This study uses the systematic literature review methodology in order to research the suitable methodology for modelling a Living Lab decision-making process that enabling multi-stakeholders, especially citizens of Smart City projects leading to the research agendas for the coming years. Finally, a conceptual framework of collaboration involving multi-stakeholders to follow the share decision-making process in a Living Lab platform is proposed.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Many studies have investigated the attitudes of mental health nurses towards a range of targets. These targets are person-oriented (for example groups of people with a similar mental health diagnosis) or practice-oriented (for example practices such as seclusion or restraint). It is thought that attitudes contribute to the practice of mental health nurses because research suggests attitudes have a role in shaping behaviour. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: To date, research about mental health nurses' attitudes has examined different attitudes in isolation from one another. By demonstrating a lack of connectedness across studies this paper highlights the need for new theory-informed approaches to attitudinal research. By standardizing measurements across different studies this review demonstrates that the most negatively appraised attitudinal targets-indicated by large proportions of respondents who appraise negatively-concern people with diagnoses of borderline personality disorder, substance misuse, and acute mental health presentations. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Significant numbers of mental health nurses may have attitudes, especially towards people with borderline personality diagnoses and those who misuse substances, that may not be concordant with good practice. There is insufficient evidence about what the actual implications this has for practice because the body of relevant research lacks coherence, interconnectedness and a grounding in contemporary theoretical developments. Training programmes that focus on attitudinal change need to be more rigorously evaluated. ABSTRACT: Introduction Attitudes are considered integral to mental health nursing practice. Aims To comprehensively describe the (i) measured attitudes of UK mental health nurses towards people and practice; (ii) effectiveness of interventions to change attitudes; and (iii) relationships between their attitudes, other variables/constructs and practice. Methods Using systematic review methodology, multiple databases (CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar) were searched. Eligible studies involved measurement of UK-based mental health nurses' attitudes with multi-item scales. Studies were quality appraised, mean (SD) attitudinal data were standardized, and other results converted to standardized effect sizes. Results N=42studies were included. Negatively appraised attitudinal targets were people with a borderline personality disorder diagnosis, substance misuse, and acute mental health presentations. Educational interventions were associated with immediate increases in positive appraisals but sustainability was poorly evidenced. There was very limited study of attitude-practice links. Discussion This review identifies priority attitudinal targets for action but also demonstrates that future work must consider the interconnectedness of attitudes and their relationship with practice. Implications for Practice Priority areas for consideration are attitudes to borderline personality disorder, substance misuse and mental health co-morbidity. Addressing disparities between nurses' attitudes and those of service users is important. More robust research is required into the effectiveness of interventions to change attitudes and into attitude-practice links.

Hospitalization can be an extremely distressful experience, especially for children. Healthcare institutions are striving to create hospital environments that respond to patient needs and promote their well-being and recovery. The San Raffaele Scientific Institute of Milan has embraced this challenge and through its eServices for Life and Health unit is striving to ideate, develop and deploy eServices in its City of the Future Living Lab, which truly meet user needs and foster innovation. In such a context, an Interactive Totem has been placed in a paediatric ward offering services aimed at educating, entertaining and empowering hospitalized children. This Totem is part of an Internet of Things platform and is being used to understand the impact of these services, achieve their fine-tuning with the collaboration of children, and at the same time to explore the role of an Internet of Things System in the Living Lab process.

Climate change leads to an unequivocal rise in the intensity and frequency of natural disasters. This necessitates mainstreaming of climate adaptation strategies in the global movement on climate action. Ecosystem-Based Adaptation (EBA) has become popular as an effective means of climate adaptation, which can be resilient and flexible compared to hard engineering-based measures. However, ecosystem-based approaches in disaster risk reduction still remain under-researched despite their growing popularity. This study delves into the utility of EBA in the context of the living lab, using a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) based Systematic Literature Review. A living lab (LL) is a participatory tool invented to foster innovation through real-life testing environments, such as individual cities. This study focuses on European coastal regions, as these are both highly populated and vulnerable to climate change impacts such as sea-level rise, storms, flooding and erosion. This study identified multiple synergies between the EBA concepts, living lab and disaster-risk reduction and concludes that EBA schemes can be highly effective in the living lab set-up. It also demonstrates that increased stakeholder engagement and the consideration of socio-economic co-benefits as part of the EBA-LL model can lead to successful disaster risk reduction.

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.

Engaging stakeholders in cultural tourism Living Labs: A pathway to innovation, sustainability, and resilience

To accelerate transformations towards just and sustainable future cities across Europe, local and regional projects need to scale up and share sustainability pathways and planning efforts. In this context, Living Labs, and innovation and experimentation spaces in general, have demonstrated great potential in serving as platforms for connecting universities with societal stakeholder, facilitating transdisciplinary collaboration in the innovation process but also as tools for cross-case learning and upscaling innovative solutions. At the same time there is an ever increasing emergence and diversification of these spaces, even within ECIU, that can often create a certain confusion and at the same time reluctance to engage and make use of them or explore their full potential. The ECIU-UTC seed project’s objective was to expand existing research and innovation initiatives of the ECIU by linking established living labs and citizen science projects run by partners and their regional ecosystems. This resulted in an initial Roadmap for the distributed network of a “Living Lab and experimentation and innovation spaces” within ECIU, an effort that will continue in the ULALABS project during the next three years where we will open up the process to the extended ECIU ecosystem. The SMART-ER Conference in Barcelona gave us an initial opportunity to share and reflect the Seed project results together with the broader community but also the objectives and scope of the new project. We envision that the ULALABS project will produce tools, methodologies and experiences that will help the community learn and understand how to make use of these innovative infrastructures to enhance their activity and its impact. At the same time aid with the effort towards the realization of the ECIU 2030 Vision1 by articulating a platform and mechanisms for integrating multi-disciplinary challenge-based research, innovation and learnings; and a distributed network of ECIU physical and virtual collaboration spaces operational and interconnected between the ECIU member universities. In this context, the ECIU consortium in its vision to establish an open, inclusive and collaborative ecosystem should seek to make the existence of the labs visible and promote their active use in teaching, research and innovation activities in future activities.

This chapter examines the role of climate change communication within the framework of the Coastal City Living Lab, focusing on the Slovenian coastal town of Piran as a pilot area under the Horizon 2020 SCORE project. The study emphasizes the significance of community engagement and participatory governance in enhancing climate resilience in coastal urban areas vulnerable to sea-level rise, storm surges, and heatwaves. Through the Living Lab methodology, local stakeholders co-create adaptive solutions while communication strategies bridge scientific knowledge with public understanding. Key activities include knowledge transfer, capacity building, and consensus-building efforts designed to address climate risks specific to Piran. This chapter highlights the importance of communication in fostering stakeholder collaboration and sustaining climate resilience initiatives beyond project lifecycles, underscoring the critical need for locally grounded, inclusive adaptation measures in the face of escalating climate challenges.

Standardized and extensible reference data model for clinical research in Living Labs