IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i5p1887-d1345704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultivating Sustainability: Quebec’s Living Labs as Ecological Catalysts

Author

Listed:
  • Oubaida Bagoudou Labo

    (School of Management Sciences, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC H2X 2J8, Canada)

  • Majlinda Zhegu

    (Department of Management, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC H2X 2J8, Canada)

  • Nicolas Merveille

    (Department of Social and Environmental Responsibility, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC H2X 2J8, Canada)

Abstract

Agriculture is often considered a major factor in environmental degradation. This case study delves into the use of sociotechnical experiments—and, more specifically, agroecosystem living labs (ALLs)—to facilitate the transition of conventional agricultural practices toward heightened sustainability. Our research indicates that achieving successful collaboration, such as an experiment, necessitates the alignment of expectations, the establishment of trust, the cultivation of patience, and the allocation of substantial resources. This investigation into agroecosystem living labs contributes to our comprehension of the actors’ networks, their interactions with experimental sites, and the dynamics of open innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Oubaida Bagoudou Labo & Majlinda Zhegu & Nicolas Merveille, 2024. "Cultivating Sustainability: Quebec’s Living Labs as Ecological Catalysts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:5:p:1887-:d:1345704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/1887/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/5/1887/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    2. Seppo Leminen & Mika Westerlund, 2012. "Towards innovation in Living Labs networks," International Journal of Product Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 17(1/2), pages 43-59.
    3. Johan Schot & Frank Geels, 2007. "Niches in evolutionary theories of technical change," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 605-622, October.
    4. Anna Stahlbrost & Birgitta Bergvall-Kareborn, 2011. "Exploring users motivation in innovation communities," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(4), pages 298-314.
    5. Stefan Kuhlmann & Arie Rip, 2018. "Next-Generation Innovation Policy and Grand Challenges," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 448-454.
    6. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    7. Walrave, Bob & Talmar, Madis & Podoynitsyna, Ksenia S. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2018. "A multi-level perspective on innovation ecosystems for path-breaking innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 103-113.
    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. Jonas Heiberg & Bernhard Truffer, 2021. "The emergence of a global innovation system – a case study from the water sector," GEIST - Geography of Innovation and Sustainability Transitions 2021(09), GEIST Working Paper Series.
    2. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    3. Švarc, Jadranka & Dabić, Marina, 2021. "Transformative innovation policy or how to escape peripheral policy paradox in European research peripheral countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Jiang, Syuan-Yi, 2022. "Transition and innovation ecosystem – investigating technologies, focal actors, and institution in eHealth innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    6. Tomasz Jałowiec & Henryk Wojtaszek & Ireneusz Miciuła, 2021. "Green Energy Management through the Implementation of RES in the EU. Analysis of the Opinions of Poland and Germany," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-33, December.
    7. Salas Gironés, Edgar & van Est, Rinie & Verbong, Geert, 2020. "The role of policy entrepreneurs in defining directions of innovation policy: A case study of automated driving in the Netherlands," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    8. Iris Wanzenböck & Koen Frenken, 2018. "The subsidiarity principle: Turning challenge-oriented innovation policy on its head," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1806, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2018.
    9. Dierk Bauknecht & Allan Dahl Andersen & Karoline Dunne, 2020. "Challenges for electricity network governance in Energy transitions: Insights from Norway," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20200115, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    10. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 180.
    11. Philippe Lefebvre, 2017. "Les Stratégies Régionales d’Innovation de « spécialisation intelligente » en Europe (Smart Specialization Strategies) : Dynamiques territoriales endogènes et institutions exogènes," Working Papers hal-01494814, HAL.
    12. Kuhlmann, Stefan & Stegmaier, Peter & Konrad, Kornelia, 2019. "The tentative governance of emerging science and technology—A conceptual introduction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1091-1097.
    13. Grashof, Nils, 2020. "Putting the watering can away Towards a targeted (problem-oriented) cluster policy framework," Papers in Innovation Studies 2020/4, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    14. 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).
    15. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    16. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & van den Berg, Jesse & Koch, Joost & Hekkert, Marko P., 2015. "Smart innovation policy: How network position and project composition affect the diversity of an emerging technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1094-1107.
    17. Grillitsch, Markus & Trippl, Michaela, 2016. "Innovation Policies and New Regional Growth Paths: A place-based system failure framework," Papers in Innovation Studies 2016/26, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    18. Zofia Gródek-Szostak & Małgorzata Luc & Anna Szeląg-Sikora & Jakub Sikora & Marcin Niemiec & Luis Ochoa Siguencia & Emil Velinov, 2020. "Promotion of RES in a Technology Transfer Network. Case Study of the Enterprise Europe Network," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-13, July.
    19. Viktorie Klímová & Vladimír Žítek & Maria Králová, 2020. "How Public R&D Support Affects Research Activity of Enterprises: Evidence from the Czech Republic," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(3), pages 888-907, September.
    20. Coenen, Lars & Grillitsch, Markus & Hansen, Teis & Moodysson, Jerker, 2017. "An innovation system framework for system innovation policy: the case of Strategic Innovation Programs (SIPs) in Sweden," Papers in Innovation Studies 2017/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.

    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:16:y:2024:i:5:p:1887-:d:1345704. 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.