The role of urban living labs in a smart city

In a rapidly changing socio-technical environment cities are increasingly seen as main drivers for change. Against this backdrop, this paper studies the emerging Urban Living Lab and Smart City concepts from a project based perspective, by assessing a series of five Smart City initiatives within one local city ecosystem. A conceptual and analytical framework is used to analyse the architecture, nature and outcomes of the Smart City Ghent and the role of Urban Living Labs. The results of our analysis highlight the potential for social value creation and urban transition. However, current Smart City initiatives face the challenge of evolving from demonstrators towards real sustainable value. Furthermore, Smart Cities often have a technological deterministic, project-based approach, which forecloses a sustainable, permanent and growing future for the project outcomes. ‘City-governed’ Urban Living Labs have an interesting potential to overcome some of the identified challenges.

[1]  Marcus Foth,et al.  Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City , 2008 .

[2]  R. Kingston,et al.  Smart Cities and Green Growth: Outsourcing Democratic and Environmental Resilience to the Global Technology Sector , 2014 .

[3]  Michiel de Lange,et al.  Owning the city: New media and citizen engagement in urban design , 2013, First Monday.

[4]  Karl A. Hribernik,et al.  State-of-the-art and good practice in the field of living labs , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[5]  U. Lichtenthaler,et al.  A Capability-Based Framework for Open Innovation: Complementing Absorptive Capacity , 2009 .

[6]  Krassimira Paskaleva,et al.  The smart city: A nexus for open innovation? , 2011 .

[7]  J. Marshall.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2004 .

[8]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[9]  Nikolaos Komninos,et al.  Intelligent Cities and Globalisation of Innovation Networks , 2008 .

[10]  Lizette de Jager,et al.  Addressing Knowledge Support Services as Part of a Living Lab Environment , 2012 .

[11]  Renata Paola Dameri,et al.  Searching for Smart City definition: a comprehensive proposal , 2013, BIOINFORMATICS 2013.

[12]  E. Ma.  Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City , 2009 .

[13]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Editorial of the Special Issue on Digital Cities , 2011, Telematics Informatics.

[14]  M. Castells.  ”Networks of Outrage and Hope. Social Movements in the Internet Age”. , 2019 .

[15]  Gabriele Irene Schliwa.  Exploring Living Labs through Transition Management - Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Urban Transitions , 2013 .

[16]  R. Kemp,et al.  Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development , 2007 .

[17]  Lieven De Marez,et al.  Smart Ideas for Smart Cities: Investigating Crowdsourcing for Generating and Selecting Ideas for ICT Innovation in a City Context , 2012, J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res..

[18]  Frank Nevens,et al.  Urban Transition Labs: co-creating transformative action for sustainable cities , 2013 .

[19]  Dong-Hee Shin,et al.  Ubiquitous city: Urban technologies, urban infrastructure and urban informatics , 2009, J. Inf. Sci..

[20]  Lieven De Marez,et al.  Living labs as quasi-experiments: results from the Flemish LeYLab , 2013 .

[21]  Colin Potts,et al.  Design of Everyday Things , 1988 .

[22]  Jihoon Kim,et al.  A Methodology of Identifying Ubiquitous Smart Services for U-City Development , 2007, UIC.

[23]  Ellie Cosgrave,et al.  Exploring the relationship between smart city policy and implementation , 2012 .

[24]  K. Eisenhardt.  Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[25]  Mika Westerlund,et al.  Managing the Challenges of Becoming an Open Innovation Company: Experiences from Living Labs , 2011 .

[26]  DAMIAN TAMBINI,et al.  New Media and Democracy , 1999, New Media Soc..

[27]  S. Juujärvi,et al.  Actor Roles in an Urban Living Lab: What Can We Learn from Suurpelto, Finland? , 2013 .

[28]  Janine O’Flynn,et al.  From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change and Managerial Implications , 2007 .

[29]  P. Ballon,et al.  Towards optimal user involvement in innovation processes: A panel-centered Living Lab-approach , 2012, 2012 Proceedings of PICMET '12: Technology Management for Emerging Technologies.

[30]  P. Nijkamp,et al.  Smart Cities in Europe , 2011 .

[31]  Caroline Herbert.  Owning the city , 2011 .

[32]  Anissa All,et al.  Bottom-up radio: creating a new media format using living lab research , 2013 .

[33]  Henry Etzkowitz,et al.  The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action , 2008 .

[34]  Tanguy Coenen,et al.  ZWERM: stimulating urban neighborhood self-organization through gamification , 2013 .

[35]  J. Blumler,et al.  The Internet and Democratic Citizenship: Theory, Practice and Policy , 2009 .

[36]  Catherine A. Middleton,et al.  An exploration of user-generated wireless broadband infrastructures in digital cities , 2011, Telematics Informatics.

[37]  Robert D. Atkinson,et al.  Technological Change and Cities , 1998 .

[38]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  Digital Cities: Towards an integrated decision support methodology , 2011, Telematics Informatics.

[39]  Tom Evens,et al.  E–deliberation 2.0 for smart cities: a critical assessment of two 'idea generation' cases , 2012 .

[40]  Robert Arnkil,et al.  Exploring Quadruple Helix Outlining user-oriented innovation models , 2010 .

[41]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .