IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i8p4562-d539600.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Living Labs on Urban Design: The Case of the Furnish Project

Author

Listed:
  • Inés Aquilué

    (CARNET, Technology Center UPC, 08034 Barcelona, Spain
    Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), 08034 Barcelona, Spain
    The first two authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Angélica Caicedo

    (CARNET, Technology Center UPC, 08034 Barcelona, Spain
    University Research Institute for Sustainability Science and Technology (IS.UPC), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), 08034 Barcelona, Spain
    The first two authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Joan Moreno

    (Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Miquel Estrada

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Laia Pagès

    (CARNET, Technology Center UPC, 08034 Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

This paper presents a framework to support the assessment of urban design projects through Urban Living Labs (ULLs). The framework is based on the Tactical Urbanism (TU) practices and involves the use of Mobile Urban Elements (MUE) in uncertain and potentially confusing conditions (e.g., the COVID-19 context). The methodology includes the application of the Four-Phase Model (problem and ideation; development; implementation, testing and assessment; final proposal) and a quantitative and qualitative assessment. The proposed assessment criteria were developed through an evaluation according to three aspects: (1) feasibility impact; (2) social impact; and (3) spatial impact. The methodology was applied to Furnish, an urban design project based on a ULL and prototyping, which was recently developed in five European cities. The empirical results, obtained using the impact analysis, indicate that the prototypes developed in the project are transferable to other cities and generate social interaction in public spaces. The applied research showed that the Four-Phase Model may be used as a new and improved iterative design process: the LOOP Scheme. The application of this assessment methodology to ULLs may provide valuable information for the future planning of urban interventions in public spaces.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4562-:d:539600
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4562/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4562/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lea Fuenfschilling & Niki Frantzeskaki & Lars Coenen, 2019. "Urban experimentation & sustainability transitions," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 219-228, February.
    2. Emma Puerari & Jotte I. J. C. De Koning & Timo Von Wirth & Philip M. Karré & Ingrid J. Mulder & Derk A. Loorbach, 2018. "Co-Creation Dynamics in Urban Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Becker, Henk A., 2001. "Social impact assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(2), pages 311-321, January.
    4. David Webb, 2018. "Tactical Urbanism: Delineating a Critical Praxis," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 58-73, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Allen Higgins & Stefan Klein, 2011. "Introduction to the Living Lab Approach," Springer Books, in: Yao-Hua Tan & Niels Björn-Andersen & Stefan Klein & Boriana Rukanova (ed.), Accelerating Global Supply Chains with IT-Innovation, chapter 0, pages 31-36, Springer.
    7. Cristina Ampatzidou & Katharina Gugerell & Teodora Constantinescu & Oswald Devisch & Martina Jauschneg & Martin Berger, 2018. "All Work and No Play? Facilitating Serious Games and Gamified Applications in Participatory Urban Planning and Governance," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 34-46.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. von Hippel, Eric & Tyre, Marcie J., 1995. "How learning by doing is done: problem identification in novel process equipment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-12, January.
    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. Emma Maev O’Connell & Eulàlia Gomez-Escoda & Álvaro Clua Uceda, 2022. "Outdoor Terraces in Barcelona and Milan: Configuration of New Spaces for Social Interaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-32, June.
    2. Erick Elysio Reis Amorim & Monique Menezes & Karoline Vitória Gonçalves Fernandes, 2022. "Urban Living Labs and Critical Infrastructure Resilience: A Global Match?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Doina Petrescu & Helena Cermeño & Carsten Keller & Carola Moujan & Andrew Belfield & Florian Koch & Denise Goff & Meike Schalk & Floris Bernhardt, 2022. "Sharing and Space-Commoning Knowledge Through Urban Living Labs Across Different European Cities," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 254-273.
    4. Marco Rossitti & Alessandra Oppio & Francesca Torrieri & Marta Dell’Ovo, 2023. "Tactical Urbanism Interventions for the Urban Environment: Which Economic Impacts?," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, July.
    5. Yilmaz, Ozge Celik & Ertekin, Ozhan, 2024. "Towards setting a standard for evaluating living labs with case studies in Turkiye," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. Sean Bradley & Israa H. Mahmoud & Alessandro Arlati, 2022. "Integrated Collaborative Governance Approaches towards Urban Transformation: Experiences from the CLEVER Cities Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    12. 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).
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4562-:d:539600. 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.