IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v3y2014i3p575-598d40571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Potential of a German Living Lab Research Infrastructure for the Development of Low Resource Products and Services

Author

Listed:
  • Justus Von Geibler

    (Wuppertal Institute for Climate Environment and Energy, Döppersberg 19, Wuppertal 42103, Germany)

  • Lorenz Erdmann

    (Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI, Breslauer Straße 48, Karlsruhe 76139, Germany)

  • Christa Liedtke

    (Wuppertal Institute for Climate Environment and Energy, Döppersberg 19, Wuppertal 42103, Germany
    Department of Design, Folkwang University of the Arts, Klemensborn 39, Essen 45239, Germany)

  • Holger Rohn

    (Faktor 10–Institut für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften gemeinnützige GmbH, Alte Bahnhofstraße 13, Friedberg 61169, Germany)

  • Matthias Stabe

    (Fraunhofer-Institute for Industrial Engineering IAO, Nobelstraße 12, Stuttgart 70569, Germany)

  • Simon Berner

    (Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI, Breslauer Straße 48, Karlsruhe 76139, Germany)

  • Kristin Leismann

    (Faktor 10–Institut für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften gemeinnützige GmbH, Alte Bahnhofstraße 13, Friedberg 61169, Germany)

  • Kathrin Schnalzer

    (Fraunhofer-Institute for Industrial Engineering IAO, Nobelstraße 12, Stuttgart 70569, Germany)

  • Katharina Kennedy

    (Wuppertal Institute for Climate Environment and Energy, Döppersberg 19, Wuppertal 42103, Germany)

Abstract

Living Labs for Sustainable Development aim to integrate users and actors for the successful generation of low-resource innovations in production-consumption systems. This paper investigates potentials of and measures towards the realization of a German Living Lab infrastructure to support actor-integrated sustainability research and innovations in Germany. Information was primarily derived from extensive dialog with experts from the fields of innovation, sustainable development and the Living Lab community (operators, users, etc. ), which was facilitated through interviews and workshops. A status quo analysis revealed that, generally, the sustainability and Living Lab communities are hardly intertwined. Twelve Living Labs that explicitly consider sustainability aspects were identified. The application fields “Living and Working”, “Town, Region and Mobility”, and “Retail and Gastronomy” were identified as particularly suitable for investigation in Living Labs and highly relevant in terms of resource efficiency. Based on the analyses of drivers and barriers and SWOT, keystones for the development of a research infrastructure for user integrated development of sustainable products and services were formulated. Suggested strategies and measures include targeted funding programs for actor-integrated, socio-technical research based on a Living Lab network, a communication campaign, and programs to foster networking and the inclusion of SMEs.

Suggested Citation

  • Justus Von Geibler & Lorenz Erdmann & Christa Liedtke & Holger Rohn & Matthias Stabe & Simon Berner & Kristin Leismann & Kathrin Schnalzer & Katharina Kennedy, 2014. "Exploring the Potential of a German Living Lab Research Infrastructure for the Development of Low Resource Products and Services," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-24, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:3:y:2014:i:3:p:575-598:d:40571
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/3/575/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/3/3/575/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sonia Talwar & Arnim Wiek & John Robinson, 2011. "User engagement in sustainability research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(5), pages 379-390, June.
    2. Klaus Wiesen & Jens Teubler & Holger Rohn, 2013. "Resource Use of Wind Farms in the German North Sea—The Example of Alpha Ventus and Bard Offshore I," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-13, October.
    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. Hacer Tercanli & Ben Jongbloed, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Literature on Living Labs in Higher Education Institutions: Potentials and Constraints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    2. Grahmann, Kathrin & Reckling, Moritz & Hernández-Ochoa, Ixchel & Donat, Marco & Bellingrath-Kimura, Sonoko & Ewert, Frank, 2024. "Co-designing a landscape experiment to investigate diversified cropping systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).

    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. de Jong, Stefan P.L. & Wardenaar, Tjerk & Horlings, Edwin, 2016. "Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: A quantitative study of two climate research programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1397-1409.
    2. Sandra Ricart & Anna Ribas & David Pavón, 2016. "Qualifying irrigation system sustainability by means of stakeholder perceptions and concerns: lessons from the Segarra‐Garrigues Canal, Spain," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1-2), pages 77-90, February.
    3. Miltos Ladikas & Julia Hahn & Lei Huang, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation and Sustainability Research: Towards a Common Methodological Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Stina Hansson & Merritt Polk, 2018. "Assessing the impact of transdisciplinary research: The usefulness of relevance, credibility, and legitimacy for understanding the link between process and impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 132-144.
    5. Laurens K. Hessels & Stefan P.L. De Jong & Stijn Brouwer, 2018. "Collaboration between Heterogeneous Practitioners in Sustainability Research: A Comparative Analysis of Three Transdisciplinary Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Gerlak, Andrea K. & Guido, Zack & Owen, Gigi & McGoffin, Mariana Sofia Rodriguez & Louder, Elena & Davies, Julia & Smith, Kelly Jay & Zimmer, Andy & Murveit, Anna M. & Meadow, Alison & Shrestha, Padme, 2023. "Stakeholder engagement in the co-production of knowledge for environmental decision-making," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    7. Tobias Luthe, 2017. "Success in Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, January.
    8. Kristin Leismann & Martina Schmitt & Holger Rohn & Carolin Baedeker, 2013. "Collaborative Consumption: Towards a Resource-Saving Consumption Culture," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-20, July.
    9. McKinley, Duncan C. & Briggs, Russell D. & Bartuska, Ann M., 2012. "When peer-reviewed publications are not enough! Delivering science for natural resource management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 1-11.
    10. Stefan Schaltegger & Markus Beckmann & Erik G. Hansen, 2013. "Transdisciplinarity in Corporate Sustainability: Mapping the Field," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 219-229, May.
    11. Christa Liedtke & Katrin Bienge & Klaus Wiesen & Jens Teubler & Kathrin Greiff & Michael Lettenmeier & Holger Rohn, 2014. "Resource Use in the Production and Consumption System—The MIPS Approach," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-31, August.
    12. Katja Brundiers & Arnim Wiek & Braden Kay, 2013. "The Role of Transacademic Interface Managers in Transformational Sustainability Research and Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(11), pages 1-23, October.
    13. Hui Zhang & Chris Dolan & Si Meng Jing & Justine Uyimleshi & Peter Dodd, 2019. "Bounce Forward: Economic Recovery in Post-Disaster Fukushima," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-24, November.
    14. Gregory Trencher & Masafumi Nagao & Chiahsin Chen & Kentaro Ichiki & Tobai Sadayoshi & Mariko Kinai & Mio Kamitani & Shojiro Nakamura & Aiko Yamauchi & Masaru Yarime, 2017. "Implementing Sustainability Co-Creation between Universities and Society: A Typology-Based Understanding," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-28, April.
    15. Cian O’Donovan & Aleksandra (Ola) Michalec & Joshua R Moon, 2022. "Capabilities for transdisciplinary research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 145-158.
    16. Max Oke Kluger & Gerhard Bartzke, 2020. "A practical guideline how to tackle interdisciplinarity—A synthesis from a post-graduate group project," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    17. Livia Fritz & Claudia R. Binder, 2018. "Participation as Relational Space: A Critical Approach to Analysing Participation in Sustainability Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-29, August.
    18. Katja Brundiers & Arnim Wiek, 2013. "Do We Teach What We Preach? An International Comparison of Problem- and Project-Based Learning Courses in Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-22, April.
    19. Dhanush Dinesh & Robert B. Zougmore & Joost Vervoort & Edmond Totin & Philip K. Thornton & Dawit Solomon & Paresh B. Shirsath & Valerien O. Pede & Isabel Lopez Noriega & Peter Läderach & Jana Körner &, 2018. "Facilitating Change for Climate-Smart Agriculture through Science-Policy Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-21, July.
    20. Dhanush Dinesh & Dries Hegger & Joost Vervoort & Bruce M. Campbell & Peter P. J. Driessen, 2021. "Learning from failure at the science–policy interface for climate action in agriculture," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1-24, January.

    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:gam:jresou:v:3:y:2014:i:3:p:575-598:d:40571. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.