How to keep a living lab alive

Purpose – This paper aims to explore how Living Labs might be evaluated, building on the current efforts of the European Network of Living Lab (ENoLL) to encourage new members, and complementing their existing criteria with elements from business model development strategies – specifically the Business Model Canvas (BMC) (Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). Design/methodology/approach – First, it is explored how Living Labs have emerged, at the intersection of transition management, open innovation and collaborative consumption. It is then suggested that the BMC could be a complementary tool in Living Lab evaluation. Findings – This tool helped identify three important elements missing from current ENoLL evaluation criteria: identification of the cost structure, customer segments and the revenue stream. The case study of an Energy Living Lab created in Western Switzerland is used to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of different evaluation criteria; this paper is then concluded with some ideas on how fu...

[1]  Telematica Instituut,et al.  THE LIVING LABS HARMONIZATION CUBE: COMMUNICATING LIVING LABS' ESSENTIALS , 2008 .

[2]  V. Ramaswamy,et al.  The Power of Co-Creation: Build It with Them to Boost Growth, Productivity, and Profits , 2010 .

[3]  Mark W. Newman,et al.  Providing an Integrated User Experience of Networked Media, Devices, and Services through End-User Composition , 2009, Pervasive.

[4]  M. Rouse,et al.  The Customer Centric Enterprise : Advances in Mass Customization and Personalization , 2003 .

[5]  Rachel Botsman,et al.  What's Mine Is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption , 2010 .

[6]  S. Darby,et al.  Load management at home: advantages and drawbacks of some ‘active demand side' options , 2013 .

[7]  Subrata Biswas,et al.  The Future of Competition: Co-Creating Unique Value with Customers , 2004 .

[8]  Andrea Emilio Rizzoli,et al.  Investigating mobility styles using smartphones: advantages and limitations according to a field study in Southern Switzerland , 2014 .

[9]  Future visioning for sustainable household practices: spaces for sustainability learning? , 2012 .

[10]  Pieter Jan Stappers,et al.  Co-creation and the new landscapes of design , 2008 .

[11]  W. Scott Stakeholders of the organizational mind , 1983 .

[12]  F. Fahy,et al.  Methods of sustainability research in the social sciences , 2013 .

[13]  Alexander Osterwalder,et al.  The business model ontology a proposition in a design science approach , 2004 .

[14]  Hans Schaffers,et al.  Smart Cities and the Future Internet: Towards Cooperation Frameworks for Open Innovation , 2011, Future Internet Assembly.

[15]  Mutaz M. Al-Debei,et al.  Developing a unified framework of the business model concept , 2010, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Thomas Röfer,et al.  Mobility Assistance in the Bremen Ambient Assisted Living Lab , 2010 .

[17]  A. Lovins,et al.  Soft energy paths: Toward a durable peace , 1977 .

[18]  Lori Tavasszy,et al.  The issues in modelling freight transport at the national level , 2016 .

[19]  Marc Pallot,et al.  Living Lab Research Landscape: From User Centred Design and User Experience towards User Cocreation , 2010 .

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

[21]  Living labs for in-situ open innovation: from idea to product validation and beyond , 2014, CSCW 2014.

[22]  P. Vergragt,et al.  Past and future of backcasting: The shift to stakeholder participation and a proposal for a methodological framework , 2006 .

[23]  Halina Szejnwald Brown,et al.  Innovations in Sustainable Consumption: New Economics, Socio-technical Transitions and Social Practices , 2013 .

[24]  P. Favero Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace , 1978 .

[25]  M. Kerkhof,et al.  Learning and stakeholder participation in transition processes towards sustainability: Methodological considerations , 2005 .