IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v48y2019i939.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance

Author

Listed:
  • Engels, Franziska
  • Wentland, Alexander
  • Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M.

Abstract

Test beds and living labs have emerged as a prominent approach to foster innovation across geographical regions and technical domains. They feed on the popular “grand societal challenges” discourse and the growing insight that adequate policy responses to these challenges will require drastic transformations of technology and society alike. Test beds and living labs represent an experimental, co-creative approach to innovation policy that aims to test, demonstrate, and advance new sociotechnical arrangements and associated modes of governance in a model environment under real-world conditions. In this paper, we develop an analytic framework for this distinctive approach to innovation. Our research draws on theories from Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Innovation Studies, as well as in-depth empirical analysis from two case studies – an urban smart energy campus and a rural renewable energy network. Our analysis reveals three characteristic frictions that test beds face: (1) the limits of controlled experimentation due to messy social responses and co-creation activity; (2) a tension between lab-like open-ended experimentation and pressures to demonstrate success; (3) the opposing needs of local socio-cultural specificity and scalability, i.e. the inherent promise of test bed outcomes being generalizable or transferrable because the tested “model society” is presumed to represent a future society at large. These tensions suggest that thinking of test beds as mere technology tests under real-world conditions is insufficient. Rather, test beds both test and re-configure society around a new set of technologies, envisioned futures, and associated modes of governance – occasionally against considerable resistance. By making social order explicitly available for experimentation, test beds tentatively stabilize new socio-technical orders on a local scale in an “as-if” mode of adoption and diffusion. Symmetric attention to the simultaneous co-production of new technical and social orders points to new opportunities and challenges for innovation governance in test-bed settings: Rather than mere enablers of technology, test beds could serve as true societal tests for the desirability of certain transformations. This will require rethinking notions of success and failure, planning with a view towards reversibility, and greater scrutiny of how power is distributed within such settings. Likewise, rather than envisioning test beds as low-regulation zones to drive innovation, they could be strategically deployed to co-develop socially desirable governance frameworks in tandem with emerging technologies in real-time.

Suggested Citation

  • Engels, Franziska & Wentland, Alexander & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2019. "Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:9:39
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.103826
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733319301465
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2019.103826?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mariana Mazzucato, 2018. "Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 803-815.
    2. Lezaun, Javier & Porter, Natalie, 2015. "Containment and competition: Transgenic animals in the One Health agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 96-105.
    3. Madeleine Akrich & Michel Callon & Bruno Latour & Adrian Monaghan, 2002. "The Key To Success In Innovation Part Ii: The Art Of Choosing Good Spokespersons," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 207-225.
    4. Späth, Philipp & Rohracher, Harald, 2010. "'Energy regions': The transformative power of regional discourses on socio-technical futures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 449-458, May.
    5. Turnheim, Bruno & Geels, Frank W., 2013. "The destabilisation of existing regimes: Confronting a multi-dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913–1967)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1749-1767.
    6. Haley, Brendan, 2018. "Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1147-1160.
    7. Madeleine Akrich & Michel Callon & Bruno Latour & Adrian Monaghan, 2002. "The Key To Success In Innovation Part I: The Art Of Interessement," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 187-206.
    8. Pinkse, Jonatan & Vernay, Anne-Lorène & D’Ippolito, Beatrice, 2018. "An organisational perspective on the cluster paradox: Exploring how members of a cluster manage the tension between continuity and renewal," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 674-685.
    9. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nuno Oliveira & Davide Secchi, 2023. "Theory Building, Case Dependence, and Researchers’ Bounded Rationality: An Illustration From Studies of Innovation Diffusion," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 52(2), pages 993-1042, May.
    2. Undheim, Trond Arne, 2024. "In search of better methods for the longitudinal assessment of tech-derived X-risks: How five leading scenario planning efforts can help," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    4. Ran Sun & James Nolan & Suren Kulshreshtha, 2022. "Agent-based modeling of policy induced agri-environmental technology adoption," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(8), pages 1-26, August.
    5. José Miguel Aguilera & Felipe Larraín, 2021. "Natural laboratories in emerging countries and comparative advantages in science: Evidence from Chile," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(6), pages 732-753, November.
    6. Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M. & Wentland, Alexander & Ruge, Luise, 2023. "Understanding regional innovation cultures: Narratives, directionality, and conservative innovation in Bavaria," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    7. Anil Engez & Seppo Leminen & Leena Aarikka-Stenroos, 2021. "Urban Living Lab as a Circular Economy Ecosystem: Advancing Environmental Sustainability through Economic Value, Material, and Knowledge Flows," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Quentin Toffolini & Mathieu Capitaine & Mourad Hannachi & Marianne Cerf, 2021. "Implementing agricultural living labs that renew actors’ roles within existing innovation systems: A case study in France [La mise en œuvre de living labs qui renouvellent les rôles des acteurs au ," Post-Print hal-03412682, HAL.
    9. Nguyen, Huong Thu & Marques, Pilar & Benneworth, Paul, 2022. "Living labs: Challenging and changing the smart city power relations?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    10. Pel, Bonno & Haxeltine, Alex & Avelino, Flor & Dumitru, Adina & Kemp, René & Bauler, Tom & Kunze, Iris & Dorland, Jens & Wittmayer, Julia & Jørgensen, Michael Søgaard, 2020. "Towards a theory of transformative social innovation: A relational framework and 12 propositions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    11. Guridi, Jose A. & Pertuze, Julio A. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2020. "Natural laboratories as policy instruments for technological learning and institutional capacity building: The case of Chile's astronomy cluster," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    12. Toffolini, Quentin & Hannachi, Mourad & Capitaine, Mathieu & Cerf, Marianne, 2023. "Ideal-types of experimentation practices in agricultural Living Labs: Various appropriations of an open innovation model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    13. Ola Michalec & Cian O’Donovan & Mehdi Sobhani, 2021. "What is robotics made of? The interdisciplinary politics of robotics research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Chris Tennant & Susan Howard & Sally Stares, 2021. "Building the UK vision of a driverless future: A Parliamentary Inquiry case study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    15. Hannes Thees & Harald Pechlaner & Natalie Olbrich & Arne Schuhbert, 2020. "The Living Lab as a Tool to Promote Residents’ Participation in Destination Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-27, February.
    16. Katharina Greve & Riccardo De Vita & Seppo Leminen & Mika Westerlund, 2021. "Living Labs: From Niche to Mainstream Innovation Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, January.
    17. 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.

    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. Engels, Franziska & Wentland, Alexander & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2019. "Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(9), pages 1-11.
    2. Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M. & Wentland, Alexander & Ruge, Luise, 2023. "Understanding regional innovation cultures: Narratives, directionality, and conservative innovation in Bavaria," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    3. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2023. "Addressing the politics of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    4. Monia Niero & Charlotte L. Jensen & Chiara Farné Fratini & Jens Dorland & Michael S. Jørgensen & Susse Georg, 2021. "Is life cycle assessment enough to address unintended side effects from Circular Economy initiatives?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1111-1120, October.
    5. Naouri, Mohamed & Kuper, Marcel & Hartani, Tarik, 2020. "The power of translation: Innovation dialogues in the context of farmer-led innovation in the Algerian Sahara," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    6. Monique Bolli, 2020. "Innovators in Urban China: Makerspaces and Marginality with Impact," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 68-77.
    7. Askfors, Ylva & Fornstedt, Helena, 2018. "The clash of managerial and professional logics in public procurement: Implications for innovation in the health-care sector," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 78-90.
    8. Signe Pedersen & Christian Clausen & Michael Søgaard Jørgensen, 2023. "Navigating value networks to co‐create sustainable business models: An actionable staging approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 240-258, January.
    9. Liliana Doganova, 2009. "Entrepreneurship as a process of collective exploration," Working Papers halshs-00431695, HAL.
    10. Omrane, Amina, 2022. "The main determinants and effects of product innovation: An exploratory study on the pastry companies of the region of Sfax (in Tunisia)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Hart O. Awa & Ojiabo Ukoha & Best C. Eke, 2016. "Adoption of emerging ICTs: The role of actors in a social network," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1259879-125, December.
    12. Johannes Glückler & Richard Shearmur & Kirsten Martinus, 2023. "Liability or opportunity? Reconceptualizing the periphery and its role in innovation," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 231-249.
    13. Oleh Pasko, 2017. "Impact of Calculative Practices on Innovation," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 66-74, December.
    14. Frédéric Goulet & Matthieu Hubert, 2020. "Making a Place for Alternative Technologies: The Case of Agricultural Bio‐Inputs in Argentina," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 535-555, July.
    15. Gasselin, Pierre & Lardon, Sylvie & Cerdan, Claire & Loudiyi, Salma & Sautier, Denis, 2020. "The coexistence of agricultural and food models at the territorial scale: an analytical framework for a research agenda," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 101(2-3), July.
    16. Cusin, Julien & Passebois-Ducros, Juliette, 2015. "Appropriate persistence in a project: The case of the Wine Culture and Tourism Centre in Bordeaux," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 341-353.
    17. Pierre Gasselin & Sylvie Lardon & Claire Cerdan & Salma Loudiyi & Denis Sautier, 2020. "The coexistence of agricultural and food models at the territorial scale: an analytical framework for a research agenda," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 101(2), pages 339-361, December.
    18. Magali Malherbe & Fanny Simon-Lee, 2015. "Learning and knowledge accumulation as sources of influence for actors during path constitution: the example of the emergence of NFC technology," Post-Print hal-01597620, HAL.
    19. Monique Bolli, 2020. "Innovators in Urban China: Makerspaces and Marginality with Impact," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 68-77.
    20. Waqas Ahmed & Sharafat Ali & Muhammad Asghar & Alisher Ismailov, 2023. "Assessment and Analysis of the Complexities in Sustainability of the Transport Projects Under CPEC: A Grounded Theory Approach," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.

    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:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:9:39. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.