Real-world Laboratories Research Articles

Participation in real-world laboratories in a new light?! Closing the gap between co-creative and deliberative participation

Sustainability-oriented real-world laboratories involve the co-design and co-creation of knowledge, based on a transdisciplinary cooperation between actors from different social worlds – academia, the administration, business, civil society – each endowed with specific interests, resources and worldviews. Sustainability-oriented real-world laboratories claim to be a means of inclusive participation in the co-creative shaping of solutions for socioecological issues and exploring pathways to sustainability. In the literature dealing with sustainability-oriented real-world laboratories, participation is thus mainly understood as active involvement by civil society, change agents and citizens in processes of experimentation and the implementation of solutions. We call this co-creative participation. However, participation in talk-based opinion formation and decision-making processes – we call this deliberative participation – is hardly discussed in the respective literature. In this paper, we argue that co-creative and deliberative participation are two forms of participation which can be conceptualized differently but which are both relevant for successful experimentation in sustainability-oriented real-world laboratories and are mainly intertwined in practice. We propose an ideal-typical conceptual framework for participation in sustainability-oriented real-world laboratories that combines co-creative and deliberative participation. The aim is to contribute to a systematization of, and rationale for, different forms of participation in real-world laboratories.

Transdisziplinäre Realexperimente und künstlerische Forschungspraktiken. Koproduktion urbaner Resilienz im Reallabor Gängeviertel in Hamburg

Using real-world laboratories, researchers in spatial sciences increasingly engage in both, shaping and observing transformation processes of urban systems. Thereby, real-world experiments are critical. As interventions into the real, they serve to test and foster possibilities of change. This paper discusses two real-world experiments with reference to the Gängeviertel in Hamburg. Their purpose was to shape the conflictual cooperation process to renovate the historic inner city quarter in a more efficient way and to gain knowledge about motives and values of those who are involved. The paper focusses on arts-based practices such as staging, arranging and performing, that were integrated into the research design with the purpose to outline their potentials for transformative research as well as to discuss challenges and constraints. Furthermore the scientific assumptions of the research design are illustrated.

NeugestaltNeugestaltung urbaner Freiräume – Einblicke in das Reallabor Wuppertalung urbaner Freiräume – Einblicke in das Reallabor Wuppertal

Cities as places of sustainability transformation are becoming increasingly important in sustainability and transition research. One of the key questions is how to proactively promote and spread urban sustainability niches. Real-world laboratories are an approach that uses experiments at the sciene-society interface to reflect sustainability challenges in a concrete (urban) context and to proactively foster complex transformation processes. This paper discusses real-world labs as spaces for experimentation and reflexive learning and introduces institutional logics and narratives as conceptual approaches to analyse these. This approach is illustrated using a case study from the real-world laboratory Wuppertal. Together with the civil society initiative “Utopiastadt”, an experiment was carried out to develop liveable urban space. Based on the results of the case study, key methodological features and the specific understanding of experiments in real-world labs are discussed. They are related to experimental approaches in planning science in order to discuss the different understandings and expectations with regard to the use of experiments as well as the potential contributions and complementarities between the two fields of research.

Wie vermeiden wir den Matthäuseffekt in Reallaboren? Selektivität in partizipativen Prozessen

The complexity and dynamics of real-world problems in transdisciplinary real-world laboratory projects require the participation of all directly and indirectly affected population groups in the participation process. All too often, participants come from socio-economically similar milieus (middleclass, male, local) and persons with a migratory background, women, young people, and members of lower income groups are represented rather weakly or not at all. This phenomenon of social selectivity is called the Matthew effect (‘whoever has, will be given’). It describes the effect that socio-economically strong persons are particularly committed to their interests, while interests of those in a (resource-wise) less well-off situation are under-represented. The paper addresses three questions: How can it be ensured, that all population groups are reached during the participation process in real-world laboratories? How can their concerns be heard and involved in it? How can civil society be empowered as co-creators? These questions will be reflected upon on the basis of empirical experience gained in the real-world lab projects Reallabor Schorndorf and Reallabor Altmarkkreis. On the basis of these reflections, recommendations for action for researchers and practitioners are developed and open research questions are derived.

Die Verstetigung von urbanen Reallaboren im Spannungsfeld theoretischer Konzeption und praktischer Umsetzung – eine empirische Untersuchung

The continuation and stabilization of urban real-world laboratories has the potential to contribute substantially to a successful socio-ecological transformation. Implementing actors face challenges which include time constraints related to project funding and the complexity of transdisciplinary research logic and practice. Selected externally funded research projects are assessed in terms of continuity, transferability, contribution to transformation, reflexivity and learning processes and transdisciplinarity to determine how project frameworks affect the continuity of real-world laboratory elements. The findings indicate a tendency towards a successful continuation of multi-stakeholder collaborations. A structural ontinuation of real-world laboratory activities by practitioners is also proven to be possible in various constellations. The termination of donor funded infrastructure and resources remains a major obstacle due to short project durations. The criteria of transdisciplinary research are accompanied by additional demands on the scientists, which in turn promote the increase in knowledge of method development and application, but must also be considered in the context of a lower output of peer-reviewed articles.

Designing real-world laboratories for sustainable urban transformation: addressing ambiguous roles and expectations in transdisciplinary teams

This paper reflects upon the potential of real-world laboratories (RWLs) to promote sustainable urban development. RWLs strive for knowledge production through collective action in experimental settings. Their implementation in urban studies faces two major challenges: (1) the ambiguity of roles university researchers need to fill, and (2) the variety of expectations among team members from different institutional backgrounds. Based on research in one trans-European and three German RWLs, we propose a stronger focus on team development to help researchers in RWLs address these challenges more systematically. In particular, this means support in terms of resources and infrastructure (time, space, and training). We argue that the improvement of RWL team performance has great impact on the potentials of RWLs in transformative urban studies. Thus, the article contributes to the ongoing debate on the city as a laboratory and site of experimentation in times of multiple crises.

Use of Control Charts and Scientific Critical Thinking in Experimental Laboratory Courses: How They Help Students to Detect and Solve Systematic Errors

Systematic errors are unfortunately common in analyses performed by students in teaching laboratories. Quality control (QC) tools are required to detect and solve bias in laboratory analyses. However, although QC has become routine in real-world laboratories, it is still rarely applied in teaching laboratories. For this reason, systematic errors in students’ results remain unknown in many cases. In this study, the use of control charts and critical thinking methodologies are applied in laboratory lessons to show students how the control charts can be used to detect and correct systematic biases in analyses. Students practice how to evaluate out-of-control results by applying scientific critical thinking procedures based on knowledge acquired in previous subjects, aiming to find the source of the bias detected, solve it, and apply rectifying measures to improve the operational procedure. With the proposed methodology, students understand the importance of control charts in demonstrating the quality and validity of the data obtained. During the academic years applying this methodology, the most common source of bias was found to be related to an incorrect application of basic laboratory skills, which shows that these skills need to be learned and, most importantly, put into practice over the whole period of student training and cannot be taken for granted once they have been taught in the early stages of their curricula. The learning outcomes were assessed through an exercise that requires students to evaluate results obtained in the laboratory in previous years. It was found that the majority of students (97.6%) were able to detect a bias, find the source, and solve the error.

Meeting the challenge of (co-)designing real-world laboratories: Insights from the Well-Being Transformation Wuppertal project

As transdisciplinary and transformative research approaches, real-world laboratories (RwLs) come with many pitfalls. Their design and implementation place high demands on everyone involved, which means that realistically, things rarely go smoothly. The following Design Report shares the lessons learned about establishing and adjusting communication and organisational structures in RwLs.What should we take into account when setting up real-world laboratories (RwLs)? In our analysis of the experience of (co-)designing three RwLs within the Well-Being Transformation Wuppertal research project, we examine both the origin of the project proposal and its implementation, from management, communication and inter- and transdisciplinarity to actor dynamics and recruitment criteria for staff. We especially highlight the effects of the initial co-design phase (project proposal) on the RwL’s implementation, focusing on the challenges which arose and how these were addressed.We conducted 19 semi-structured interviews, analysed relevant project documentation and reflected on the research team’s own experiences. The transdisciplinary and transformative dimensions of the RwL approach are the areas where significant lessons were learned. RwLs are unique in their extraordinarily strong need to balance different roles and resources, even as many of their challenges and solutions resemble those which also arise in transdisciplinary research. The uniqueness of RwLs lies in their objective to co-produce not only socially robust knowledge but also tangible real-world change through experimentation.

Science policy recommendations for funding real-world laboratories and comparable formats

Dealing with a research format that is both transformative and transdisciplinary remains a challenge, also for funders. Based on insights gained from accompanying 14 projects running as real-world laboratories in Baden-Württemberg from 2015 to 2019 ‐ the so-called BaWü Labs, ten recommendations are proposed for funders.

Reinventing the third mission of higher education in Germany: political frameworks and universities\u2019 reactions

Higher education systems are changing due to trends of funding pressures, increasing social demands and growing numbers of students. Even though teaching and research are still considered as the pivotal functions of universities, other activities such as technology transfer, lifelong learning or social engagement have broadened the scope of their actions. These activities, labelled as third mission, are supposed to strengthen the impact of science in society and epitomize the changing role of universities. In Germany, the federal government and the states announced different programs aiming to foster these activities, e.g. the “Innovative Hochschule” or Real-world Laboratories. In this article, we first want to develop a definition framework of third mission. In two further steps we analyze how politics and policies in Germany have framed the concept in the last few years and how public universities are responding to this in their formal structure. We use approaches of neo-institutional theory according to which organizations such as universities create institutionalized structures and reflect institutional rules in order to maintain legitimacy. As an example of organizational formal structure we analyze mission statements of public universities. Using computer-based qualitative content analysis, we assess to what extent these universities take up the third mission. Our results show that most universities mention the third mission in their mission statements. However, the focus is mainly limited to economic impact and (technical) knowledge transfer. Much less emphasis is put on civic engagement or further education issues.

A distributed case‐ and project‐based learning to design 3D lab on electronic engineering education

AbstractRecently, virtual laboratories have popping up in online learning for students to self‐enroll in the experiments. Like in‐class teaching methodology, virtual laboratories need to meet the requirements as same as real world laboratories and support efficient learning and communication services. In this paper, we detail the development of our distributed 3D lab system based on case‐and project‐based learning method, which support semi‐automatic experiment creation, assessment and knowledge‐based instant conversation. We demonstrated the potential of our system with a case study in a subject of electronic engineering. The preliminary results indicated that our system demonstrated the potential of providing flexible assessment, saving time, improving experimental skills and making students more confident.

Towards a Cyclical Concept of Real-World Laboratories

The transformative research approach of Real-World Laboratories (RWL) has recently attracted attention in German sustainability science. Some definitions and understandings have been published, but guidelines and procedural quality criteria for establishing and running a RWL are still missing. To address this gap, this article has two aims. First, it aims to derive key components of RWLs from the current discourse on RWLs and similar, but more elaborated research approaches. Second, it aims to transfer these key components into a comprehensive research practice. This practice is illustrated by the RWL process in the project “Well-being Transformation Wuppertal” (WTW).Methodologically, the article builds on a review of RWL-related approaches for collaborative, intervention-oriented research. This includes transition management, transdisciplinary process models and action research. Based on this review, eight key components for RWLs are proposed. They position RWLs as a normatively framed approach that aims to contribute to local action for sustainable development and the empowerment of change agents. The approach uses transdisciplinary methods of knowledge integration and engages in cyclical real-world interventions within certain spatial and content-related boundaries.The components are transferred into a flowchart, detailing process steps, aims, responsibilities and overall principles for putting RWLs into practice. Thus, a hitherto missing tool for designing and running RWLs is provided. Then, the RWL in the district of Mirke, Wuppertal, is used as an empirical example to illustrate the application of the flowchart and related key components. Consecutive discussions centre on the different roles of researchers and practitioners in the research process, as well as the relevance of an underlying theory of change for effective interventions. Finally, critical reflection, application and amendment of the proposed flowchart are encouraged.

Tensions and Trade-offs in Real-World Laboratories - The Participants' Perspective

Real-world laboratories have made their way into policy programs and corporate agendas. They are expected to foster innovation on both the local and wider societal scales through co-creative settings in the “real world”. Yet little attention has been paid to how these multiple expectations affect micro-level practices and pose challenges for the heterogeneous actors involved in these settings. Two case studies show the emerging tensions relating to participation, temporality and space, and the ways in which participants perceive and deal with them.

Designing Real-World Laboratories for the Reduction of Residential Energy Use: Articulating Theories of Change

Real-world laboratories (RwLs) hold potential for transdisciplinary research that considers the context of changing households’ energy practices. Taking into account stakeholders’ understandings of what would work where, how and why helps to recognize the contextual conditions for the transferability of RwL results.Reducing residential energy use and carbon dioxide emissions is a policy concern across Europe. One of the approaches to address this problem, real-world laboratories (RwLs), has recently gained prominence as a means to generate both sustainability change and social knowledge. Yet RwLs are context-bound, and transferability is an issue for scaling up change. Drawing on Realistic Evaluation (RE) and Theories of Change (ToC), this paper analyses researchers’ and practitioners’ views on the role of contexts and change mechanisms in the outcomes of interventions targeting residential energy use. The results show that extracting the underlying logic of RwL designs could help to identify where and when these designs are likely to be transferrable. This contribution has implications for the design of future RwLs, given that RwLs have until now rarely articulated their ToC.

Insights into and Recommendations from Three Real-World Laboratories: An Experience-Based Comparison

Real-world laboratories (RwLs) from an inside perspective: comparing interior design, sustainable development, transformation and learning in three RwLs, we present core issues for the future design of RwLs.Real-world laboratories (RwLs) as a new format within transdisciplinary science aim at promoting learning for and transformation towards sustainability. However, what are essential aspects to take into account while initiating and stabilizing such processes within RwLs? Comparing lessons learned of three German RwLs (BaWü Labs), we show that for establishing RwLs as melting pots for transdisciplinary research and societal transformation, four properties are crucial: an interior design that enables transdisciplinary research and intervention (in particular real-world experiments) based on a stable infrastructure; sustainability as guiding and operationalized principle for differentiating the format “RwL” from other labs; overarching research programs for assessing transformative effects of RwLs and didactic concepts suitable for RwL circumstances. Since RwLs mainly address a long-term cultural change, a long-term funding and research structure are essential as well.

Real-World Laboratories - the Road to Transdisciplinary Research?

Real-World Laboratories - the Road to Transdisciplinary Research?

Changing Faces - Factors Influencing the Roles of Researchers in Real-World Laboratories

In real-world laboratories (RwLs), researchers do more than conventional research. They slip into different roles. Why do they “change faces”? Based on comparisons of three urban RwLs, we analyse the process steps and conditions influencing the choices made by researchers to adopt certain roles.Real-world laboratories (RwLs) often put researchers in highly demanding research contexts regarding their roles and self-conceptions. Helpful roles of researchers have been described but still little is known about the factors influencing the adoption of certain roles. Using data from three parallel RwLs in Wuppertal, Germany, we found four roles of researchers: the reflective scientist, the facilitator, the change agent and the (self-)reflexive scientist. We sequenced the RwLs into situations and analysed them by RwL process steps and conditions, considering the roles of researchers as outcomes. Although the conditions convey only limited explanatory power, there was a consistent picture that being pressured to carry out real-world action, having a practice partner with fewer resources and working without a functional project group is (in conjunction) sufficient to cause the researcher to partake in activities beyond conventional research. Process steps played a minor role. Our research on factors influencing the adoption of roles may help RwL researchers to perform their roles as intended.

What Is It Good For? Reflecting and Systematizing Accompanying Research to Research Programs

Implementing innovative research formats such as real-world laboratories can be supported by accompanying research. On condition that their specifics are observed, accompanying research inquiring into the processes taking place and accompanying research facilitating the production of integrated knowledge are particularly beneficial.There is hardly any tradition of accompanying research to running research programs and basically no scientific debate dealing with this kind of research. The paper contributes to this debate by suggesting a typology of accompanying research based on the authors’ experiences in conducting such research. Given that its independence is preserved, accompanying research to research programs is not a luxury but provides added value. In cases where new or unusual formats of research are adopted, such as the format of transdisciplinary and transformative real-world laboratories, it might even be a necessity. The paper is conceptual. It discusses the special nature (added value and success factors) of accompanying research to research programs along the dimensions “research” ‐ what kind of scientific knowledge is produced?, “relationship to the actors” ‐ what is the special relationship to the other projects (and the funding agency)?, and “process-related tasks” ‐ what additional tasks can be incorporated? The accompanying research to the BaWü Lab program will be presented against this backdrop.

Dealing with Multi-Perspectivity in Real-World Laboratories: Experiences from the Transdisciplinary Research Project Urban Transformation Laboratories

Real-world laboratories bring together stakeholders from research and outside academia in sustainability experimentation. However, different perspectives of partners and inherent goal conflicts often inhibit collaboration. We present strategies how multi-perspectivity can be channeled into synergies instead of unsurmountable conflicts.The project Urban Transformation Laboratories in Lokstedt (Hamburg) seeks to identify novel ways to combine local climate mitigation with urban planning, with a particular focus on the perspectives of local citizens. It serves as an example of transdisciplinary collaboration between two university partners and two local authorities, practice partners, and citizens. This Design Report focuses on strategies to address the challenges posed by multi-perspectivity among these different project stakeholders. We assume that building and maintaining trustful relations requires a careful balance of multiple perspectives, and that working with differences instead of forcing all partners to accept a unified perspective is the key to a successful collaboration. Finally, we briefly discuss the lessons we have learned so far on dealing with multi-perspectivity and the modifications we have introduced to our design.

Structure Matters: Real-World Laboratories as a New Type of Large-Scale Research Infrastructure: A Framework Inspired by Giddens' Structuration Theory

In order to grasp the transformative potential of real-world laboratories, it is essential to understand them as a large-scale research infrastructure. Unlike single transdisciplinary projects and processes, real-world labs are not only about temporary interventions or knowledge integration. They are also about establishing long-lasting spaces for transformation and reflexive learning.