IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p14009-d955378.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review on the Application of the Living Lab Concept and Role of Stakeholders in the Energy Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Sphokazi Phelokazi Mbatha

    (School of Public Leadership, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch 7602, South Africa)

  • Josephine Kaviti Musango

    (Graduate School of Business, University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7700, South Africa)

Abstract

The living lab concept is identified as having the potential to provide a platform to test technologies and support energy transition. However, the application of the concept to the energy sector is limited, though emerging. This study undertook a systematic literature review to understand the extent of the application of the living lab concept, with the particular aim of informing the processes to establish such a platform in urban Africa. Using a sample of 35 papers, only 17 papers were related to energy-living labs, while 18 papers were outside the energy field. The scale and contexts of the application of living labs were diverse. However, not all initiatives that defined themselves as living labs were characterised by elements typical of the concept of a living lab. Further, how the stakeholders were identified, and the stakeholder recruitment process in energy living labs was unclear in the sampled studies. A recommendation is to improve transparency in the stakeholder identification, engagement, and recruitment process in energy living labs and to incorporate gendered issues into the setup and management of urban energy living labs.

Suggested Citation

  • Sphokazi Phelokazi Mbatha & Josephine Kaviti Musango, 2022. "A Systematic Review on the Application of the Living Lab Concept and Role of Stakeholders in the Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14009-:d:955378
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14009/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14009/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Veronika Zavratnik & Argene Superina & Emilija Stojmenova Duh, 2019. "Living Labs for Rural Areas: Contextualization of Living Lab Frameworks, Concepts and Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Mukama, Matia & Musango, Josephine Kaviti & Smit, Suzanne & Ceschin, Fabrizio & Petrulaityte, Aine, 2022. "Development of living labs to support gendered energy technology innovation in poor urban environments," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Alexis Habiyaremye, 2020. "Knowledge exchange and innovation co-creation in living labs projects in South Africa," Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 207-222, May.
    4. Dvarioniene, Jolanta & Gurauskiene, Inga & Gecevicius, Giedrius & Trummer, Dora Ruth & Selada, Catarina & Marques, Isabel & Cosmi, Carmelina, 2015. "Stakeholders involvement for energy conscious communities: The Energy Labs experience in 10 European communities," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 512-518.
    5. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    6. Paskaleva, Krassimira & Cooper, Ian, 2021. "Are living labs effective? Exploring the evidence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    7. Paul Save & Belgin Terim Cavka & Thomas Froese, 2021. "Evaluation and Lessons Learned from a Campus as a Living Lab Program to Promote Sustainable Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    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. 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. Gerd Lupp & Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Josh J. Huang & Amy Oen & Stephan Pauleit, 2020. "Living Labs—A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Abi Saad, Elie & Agogué, Marine, 2024. "Living Labs in science-industry collaborations: Roles, design, and application patterns," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    4. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    5. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    7. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    8. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    9. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    10. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    11. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    12. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    14. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    15. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.
    17. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    18. Qing Ye & Bao-Xin Qian & Wei-Li Yin & Feng-Mei Wang & Tao Han, 2016. "Association between the HFE C282Y, H63D Polymorphisms and the Risks of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease, Liver Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis o," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, September.
    19. Bishal Mohindru & David Turner & Tracey Sach & Diana Bilton & Siobhan Carr & Olga Archangelidi & Arjun Bhadhuri & Jennifer A. Whitty, 2020. "Health State Utility Data in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 13-25, March.
    20. Subramaniam, Mega & Pang, Natalie & Morehouse, Shandra & Asgarali-Hoffman, S. Nisa, 2020. "Examining vulnerability in youth digital information practices scholarship: What are we missing or exhausting?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    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:14:y:2022:i:21:p:14009-:d:955378. 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.