IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/urbpla/v7y2022i3p274-284.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Scaling Potential of Experimental Knowledge in the Case of the Bauhaus.MobilityLab, Erfurt (Germany)

Author

Listed:
  • Luise Kraaz

    (Chair of Transport System Planning, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany)

  • Maria Kopp

    (Chair of Transport System Planning, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany)

  • Maximilian Wunsch

    (Chair of Transport System Planning, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany)

  • Uwe Plank-Wiedenbeck

    (Chair of Transport System Planning, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany)

Abstract

Real-world labs hold the potential to catalyse rapid urban transformations through real-world experimentation. Characterised by a rather radical, responsive, and location-specific nature, real-world labs face constraints in the scaling of experimental knowledge. To make a significant contribution to urban transformation, the produced knowledge must go beyond the level of a building, street, or small district where real-world experiments are conducted. Thus, a conflict arises between experimental boundaries and the stimulation of broader implications. The challenges of scaling experimental knowledge have been recognised as a problem, but remain largely unexplained. Based on this, the article will discuss the applicability of the “typology of amplification processes” by Lam et al. (2020) to explore and evaluate the potential of scaling experimental knowledge from real-world labs. The application of the typology is exemplified in the case of the Bauhaus.MobilityLab. The Bauhaus.MobilityLab takes a unique approach by testing and developing cross-sectoral mobility, energy, and logistics solutions with a distinct focus on scaling knowledge and innovation. For this case study, different qualitative research techniques are combined according to “within-method triangulation” and synthesised in a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis. The analysis of the Bauhaus.MobilityLab proves that the “typology of amplification processes” is useful as a systematic approach to identifying and evaluating the potential of scaling experimental knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Luise Kraaz & Maria Kopp & Maximilian Wunsch & Uwe Plank-Wiedenbeck, 2022. "The Scaling Potential of Experimental Knowledge in the Case of the Bauhaus.MobilityLab, Erfurt (Germany)," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 274-284.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v7:y:2022:i:3:p:274-284
    DOI: 10.17645/up.v7i3.5329
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/5329
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/up.v7i3.5329?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc Dijk & Joop De Kraker & Anique Hommels, 2018. "Anticipating Constraints on Upscaling from Urban Innovation Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Lea Fuenfschilling & Niki Frantzeskaki & Lars Coenen, 2019. "Urban experimentation & sustainability transitions," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 219-228, February.
    3. Darren Sharp & Rob Raven, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 195-207.
    4. Timo von Wirth & Lea Fuenfschilling & Niki Frantzeskaki & Lars Coenen, 2019. "Impacts of urban living labs on sustainability transitions: mechanisms and strategies for systemic change through experimentation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 229-257, February.
    5. A Khakee & A Barbanente & D Borri, 2000. "Expert and experiential knowledge in planning," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(7), pages 776-788, July.
    6. Darren Sharp & Rob Raven, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 195-207.
    7. Andrew Karvonen & Bas Heur, 2014. "Urban Laboratories: Experiments in Reworking Cities," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 379-392, March.
    8. Marc Wolfram & Niki Frantzeskaki, 2016. "Cities and Systemic Change for Sustainability: Prevailing Epistemologies and an Emerging Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-18, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luise Kraaz & Maria Kopp & Maximilian Wunsch & Uwe Plank-Wiedenbeck, 2022. "The Scaling Potential of Experimental Knowledge in the Case of the Bauhaus.MobilityLab, Erfurt (Germany)," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 274-284.
    2. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    3. Marina Van Geenhuizen & Razieh Nejabat, 2021. "Municipalities’ Policy on Innovation and Market Introduction in Sustainable Energy: A Focus on Local Young Technology Firms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Sebastian Fastenrath & Lars Coenen & Kathryn Davidson, 2019. "Urban Resilience in Action: the Resilient Melbourne Strategy as Transformative Urban Innovation Policy?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-10, January.
    5. Caroline Newton, 2021. "The Role of Government Initiated Urban Planning Experiments in Transition Processes and Their Contribution to Change at the Regime Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, February.
    6. Carlos Smaniotto Costa & Marluci Menezes & Petja Ivanova-Radovanova & Tatiana Ruchinskaya & Konstantinos Lalenis & Monica Bocci, 2021. "Planning Perspectives and Approaches for Activating Underground Built Heritage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-15, September.
    7. Lindsay P. Galway & Charles Z. Levkoe & Rachel L. W. Portinga & Kathryn Milun, 2021. "A Scoping Review Examining Governance, Co-Creation, and Social and Ecological Justice in Living Labs Literature," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Devon McAslan & Farah Najar Arevalo & David A. King & Thaddeus R. Miller, 2021. "Pilot project purgatory? Assessing automated vehicle pilot projects in U.S. cities," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Rachel Greer & Timo Wirth & Derk Loorbach, 2023. "The Circular Decision-Making Tree: an Operational Framework," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 693-718, June.
    10. Waes, Arnoud van & Nikolaeva, Anna & Raven, Rob, 2021. "Challenges and dilemmas in strategic urban experimentationAn analysis of four cycling innovation living labs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    11. Daniel Black & Susanne Charlesworth & Maria Ester Dal Poz & Erika Cristina Francisco & Adina Paytan & Ian Roderick & Timo von Wirth & Kevin Winter, 2023. "Comparing Societal Impact Planning and Evaluation Approaches across Four Urban Living Labs (in Food-Energy-Water Systems)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Paula Kivimaa & Karoline S. Rogge, 2020. "Interplay of Policy Experimentation and Institutional Change in Transformative Policy Mixes: The Case of Mobility as a Service in Finland," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-17, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    13. Tim Strasser & Joop de Kraker & René Kemp, 2020. "Three Dimensions of Transformative Impact and Capacity: A Conceptual Framework Applied in Social Innovation Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-40, June.
    14. Fedoua Kasmi & Ferney Osorio & Laurent Dupont & Brunelle Marche & Mauricio Camargo, 2022. "Innovation Spaces as Drivers of Eco-innovations Supporting the Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Post-Print hal-03590438, HAL.
    15. Inés Aquilué & Angélica Caicedo & Joan Moreno & Miquel Estrada & Laia Pagès, 2021. "A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Living Labs on Urban Design: The Case of the Furnish Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    16. Kelly Bronson & Rachana Devkota & Vivian Nguyen, 2021. "Moving toward Generalizability? A Scoping Review on Measuring the Impact of Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    18. Uyarra, Elvira & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel & Flanagan, Kieron & Magro, Edurne, 2020. "Public procurement, innovation and industrial policy: Rationales, roles, capabilities and implementation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    19. Christian Scholl & Joop de Kraker, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment: Practices, Outcomes, and Impacts," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 156-160.
    20. Chris McPhee & Margaret Bancerz & Muriel Mambrini-Doudet & François Chrétien & Christian Huyghe & Javier Gracia-Garza, 2021. "The Defining Characteristics of Agroecosystem Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v7:y:2022:i:3:p:274-284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.