scholarly journals Von Reallaboren zu urbanen Experimenten: deutsche und internationale Debatten zu Skalierung und urbanen Nachhaltigkeitstransformationen

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 322-335
Author(s):  
Kristine Kern ◽  
Wolfgang Haupt
Keyword(s):  
Urban Living ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Joint Programming

In den letzten Jahren sind Reallabore zu einem wichtigen Bestandteil der anwendungsbezogenen Nachhaltigkeitsforschung geworden. In Deutschland wurde die Forschung zu Reallaboren durch entsprechende Forschungsprogramme gefördert (z.B. „Leitinitiative Zukunftsstadt“ des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung), während die EU die Entwicklung von „Urban Living Labs“ finanziell förderte (z.B. „Joint Programming Initiative Urban Europe“). Derzeit verlagert sich die internationale wissenschaftliche Debatte mehr und mehr auf die Untersuchung von lokalen Experimenten. Vor diesem Hintergrund soll dieser Artikel vor allem dem Zweck dienen, die deutschsprachige Forschung zu Reallaboren innerhalb der europäischen und internationalen Debatten zu verorten und systematisch mit den Debatten zu „Urban Living Labs“ und Experimenten zu vergleichen. In diesem Zusammenhang konzentrieren wir uns vor allem auf die Grundannahmen dieser drei Ansätze, ihre Entstehung und Anwendungsbereiche sowie die Bedeutung von Lernprozessen. Obwohl alle drei Ansätze auf urbane Nachhaltigkeitstransformationen abzielen, ist nur wenig über die mittel- und langfristigen Wirkungen solcher Initiativen bekannt. Deren zeitliche und räumliche Skalierung, die hier entscheidend ist, wurde zwar als Problem erkannt, aber bislang kaum systematisch untersucht. Der Artikel zielt darauf ab, die deutsche Debatte zu Reallaboren zu bereichern und sie mit der internationalen Diskussion zu verbinden. 

The Blue-Green Urban Living Labs of Kuala Lumpur

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (13) ◽  
pp. 359-367
Author(s):  
Jamalunlaili Abdullah ◽  
Raziah Ahmad ◽  
Muhammad Hafiz Zainal
Keyword(s):  
Green Infrastructure ◽  
Publishing House ◽  
Kuala Lumpur ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
The Public ◽  
Societal Challenges ◽  
Private Citizen ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
International Publishing ◽  
Open Access Article

The extraordinary societal challenges demand cities to be innovative and adaptable to the needs of urban citizens. In the Malaysian context, the Blue-Green Infrastructure (BGI) has not been well incorporated into the ULLs. This paper seeks to address this gap by exploring the potential of the Blue-Green Urban Living Labs (BGULLs) at the Sungai Bunus catchment area. Using Google Form, survey questionnaire is conducted among professionals and the public. Findings of this unprecedented study suggest the BGULLs offer beyond beautification works, and it is voicing the virtual idea of the BGULLs into a real setting that reflects the public-private-citizen partnerships.Keywords: Urban living labs; Blue-Green Infrastructure; Innovation; societal challengeseISSN: 2398-4287 © 2020. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v5i13.2072

scholarly journals Urban Living Labs, Circular Economy and Nature-Based Solutions: Ideation and Testing of a New Soil in the City of Turin Using a Multi-stakeholder Perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grazia Sveva Ascione ◽  
Federico Cuomo ◽  
Nicole Mariotti ◽  
Laura Corazza
Keyword(s):  
Circular Economy ◽  
Stakeholder Management ◽  
Participant Observation ◽  
Green Roofs ◽  
Exploratory Research ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
Natural Systems ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
The City

AbstractIn the attempt to foster circular economy (CE), cities are increasingly adopting urban living labs (ULLs) as sites of co-production aimed at testing alternative solutions based on the reuse of products, reduction of consumption and recycling of materials. Taking this perspective, our study adopts an exploratory research design to discover the pragmatic implications emerging from a case study. The City of Turin joined proGIreg, a European project that entails the regeneration of former industrial districts by means of nature-based solutions (NBS). Ranging from aquaponics to green roofs, seven NBS have been experimented in Turin, which rely on the use of natural systems to tackle social, economic and environmental challenges efficiently and sustainably. Among them, the most promising is related to the production and test of the ‘new soil’, a blend obtained by mixing earth materials coming from construction sites with compost, zeolites and mycorrhizae. The case herein presented is interesting to analyse for the multi-stakeholder management setting used, where public institutions, private companies, research institutions, citizens and associations collaborated in the co-creation and testing phase of the NBS. Consequently, the data collected through participant observation and direct interviews allow researchers to describe multi-stakeholders’ dynamics and how they work. Thus, this paper narrates a micro-contextual experience while providing a critique. Results include an analysis of the unique combination of different stakeholders, which strongly impacted on the management and the effectiveness of the entire project. By consequence, the paper offers both theoretical contributions to the relational branch of stakeholder theory and practical evidence in demonstrating the importance of the relational branch of the theory over a more traditional transactional view.

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.

Bringing Urban Living Labs to Communities

2018 ◽  
pp. 106-125
Author(s):  
Janice Astbury ◽  
Harriet Bulkeley
Keyword(s):  
Urban Living ◽  
Living Labs

Urban Living Labs

2018 ◽  
pp. 21-36
Author(s):  
Yuliya Voytenko Palgan ◽  
Kes McCormick ◽  
James Evans
Keyword(s):  
Urban Living ◽  
Living Labs

scholarly journals Improvising urban spaces, inhabiting the in-between

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 664-681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Müller ◽  
Elena Trubina
Keyword(s):  
Participant Observation ◽  
Urban Spaces ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Protest ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
Urban Living ◽  
Living Labs ◽  
Media Reports ◽  
Boris Yeltsin

This paper discusses improvisation as a liminal practice of inhabiting the in-between that marks urban spaces from squats and brownfields to communal gardens, from infrastructural maintenance and urban living labs to political protest and solidarity in times of crisis. It shows how improvisation emerges in the interstices between uncertain flux and ossified rigidities to construct in-between spaces of ambiguous political openings even in ostensibly formal, rigid contexts. To that end, it draws on documents, media reports, interviews and participant observation to analyse the multiple mutations of what eventually became the Boris Yeltsin Presidential Centre in Ekaterinburg, a cultural flagship in Russia’s third largest city. Morphed from an abandoned office block into a memorial multi-purpose complex, the Yeltsin Centre is the product of elites and ordinary people responding to conjunctural openings in seemingly inert structures. While highlighting the political openings made possible by improvisation inhabiting the in-between, the paper also underscores the ambiguous nature of this practice and its limits.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document