Systematic Review of Living Lab Concept

  • Edna Rocío Bravo Ibarra

Abstract

Living laboratories are spaces that group research, analysis and experimentation to achieve answers to social, business, technological and environmental problems. For this, a systematic review of the existing literature of the concept was carried out: its origin, characteristics, most important contexts and establish how it relates to innovation. Scientific documents were reviewed from the available academic literature of the different theoretical approaches and it was concluded that with the analysis of the theoretical concept this methodological tool can be understood in its contribution to the innovation processes.

References

Almirall, E. Wareham, J., (2009). Contributions of Living Labs in Reducing Market Based Risk. International Conference on Concurrent Enterpreise.

Almirall, E., Lee, M., & Wareham, J. (2012). Mapping Living Labs in the Landscape of Innovation Methodologies. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 12– 18. http://timreview.ca/article/603

Ballon, P., Pierson, J., & Delaere, S. (2005). Test and experimentation platforms for broadband innovation: examining european practice. In Open Innovation Platforms For Broadband Services: Benchmarking European Practices (Open Innovation Platforms For Broadband Services: Benchmarking European Practices). Paper for the 16th European Regional Conference by the International Telecommunications Society (ITS), Porto (Portugal), 4-6 September 2005..

Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., & Ståhlbröst, A. (2009). Living Lab: An Open and Citizen-Centric Approach for Innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(4): 356–370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIRD.2009.022727

Boateng, R. (2011). Do organizations learn when employees learn: the link between individual and organizational learning. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 6-9.

Chesbrough, H. W., & Bogers, M. (2014). Explicating open inno- vation: clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W.

Vanhaverbeke & J. West (Eds.), New frontiers in open innovation, 3-28.ENoLL. (2016). What is a Living Lab?

European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL), Último acceso October 8, 2017: http://www.openlivinglabs.eu/FAQ

Chesbrough HW, Growther AK. (2006). Beyond high- tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries, R&D Management, 229-236.

Eriksson, M., Niitamo, V.-P., & Kulkki. S. (2005). State-of-the-Art in Utilizing Living Labs Approach to User- Centric ICT Innovation – A European Approach. Center for Distance-spanning Technology. Lulea University of Technology, Sweden. Nokia Oy, Centre for Knowledge and Innovation Research at Helsinki School of Economics, Finland.

Følstad, A. (2008). Living Labs for Innovation and Development of Communication Technology: A Literature Review. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10: 99–131.

Fulgencio, H., Le Fever, H., & Katzy, B. (2012). Living Lab: Innovation through Pastiche (A Research Linking Disparate and Discorded Ontology). In Proceedings of eChallenges e-2012, Lisbon, Portugal, October 17–19.

Franz, Y., Tausz, K., & Thiel, S. - K. 2015. Contextuality and Co-Creation Matter: A Qualitative Case Study Comparison of Living Lab Concepts in Urban Research. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(12): 48-55. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/952

Gassmann, O. (2006). Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management, 223-228.

Georges, A., Schuurman, D., & Vervoort, K. 2016. Factors Affecting the Attrition of Test Users During Living Lab Field Trials. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(1): 35-44. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/959

Guzmán, J. G., del Carpio, A. F., Colomo-Palacios, R. & de Diego, M. V. (2013). Living Labs for User-Driven Innovation A Process Reference Model, Research-Technology Management, 29-39.

Hakkarainen, L., & Hyysalo, S. (2016). The Evolution of Intermediary Activities: Broadening the Concept of Facilitation in Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6(1): 45–58. http://timreview.ca/article/960

Intille, S. S., Larson, K., Munguia Tapia, E., Beaudin, J., Kaushik, P., Nawyn, J., & R. Rockinson, R. 2006. Using a Live-In Laboratory for Ubiquitous Computing Research. In K. P. Fishkin, B. Schiele, P. Nixon, & A. Quigley (Eds.), Proceedings of PERVASIVE 2006, LNCS 3968: 349-365. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Katzy, B. (2012). Designing Viable Business Models for Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 19–24. http://timreview.ca/article/604

Leminen, S. (2015). Q&A. What Are Living Labs? Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(9): 29–35. http://timreview.ca/article/928

Leminen, S. 2013. Coordination and Participation in Living Lab Networks. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3(11): 5–14. http://timreview.ca/article/740

Leminen, S., & Westerlund, M. (2009). From Innovation Networks to Open Innovation Communities: Co- Creating Value with Customers and Users, Marseilles, France, September 3–5.

Leminen, S., Westerlund, M., & Nyström A.-G. (2012). Living Labs as Open Innovation Networks. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 6–11. http://timreview.ca/article/602

Leminen, S., Westerlund, M., & Nyström, A.-G. (2014). On Becoming Creative Consumers – User Roles in Living Labs Networks. International Journal of Technology Marketing, 9(1): 33–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTMKT.2014.058082

Mabrouki, O., Chibani, A., Amirat, Y., Valenzuela Fernandez, M. & Navarro de la Cruz, M. (2010). Context- Aware Collaborative Platform in Rural Living Labs, 65-76

Mulder, I.J., Stappers, P.J., (2009). Co-creating in practice: results and challenges. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising, ICE 2009, "Collaborative Innovation: Emerging Technologies, Environments and Communities", Thoben, K.D., Pawar, K.S.,

Katzy, B. & Bierwolf, R, 1-8.Niitamo, V.-

Mulder, I. 2012. Living Labbing the Rotterdam Way: Co-Creation as an Enabler for Urban Innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 39-43. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/607

Niitamo, V.-P., Westerlund, M., & Leminen, S. 2012. A Small-Firm Perspective on the Benefits of Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 44–49. http://timreview.ca/article/608

Oestmann & Dymond, Telecentres - experiences, lessons and trends, in the commonwealth of learning. 2001

Rits, O., Schuurman, D., & Ballon, P. 2015. Exploring the Benefits of Integrating Business Model Research within Living Lab Projects. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(12): 19-27. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/949

Ståhlbröst, A., & Bergvall-Kåreborn, B. 2011. Exploring Users Motivation in Innovation Communities. International Journal Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, (14)4: 298–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJEIM.2011.043051

Ståhlbröst, A. (2012). A Living Lab as a Service: Creating Value for Micro-enterprises through Collaboration and Innovation, Technology Innovation Management Review, 37–42.

Ståhlbröst, A., (2008). Forming Future IT: The Living Lab Way of User Involvement. Doctoral Thesis: Lulea University of Technology.

Ståhlbröst, A. 2013. A Living Lab as a Service: Creating Value for Micro-enterprises through Collaboration and Innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3(11): 37-42. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/744

Schuurman, D., & De Marez, L. 2012. Structuring User Involvement in Panel-Based Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 31-38. http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/606

Schuurman, D., De Marez, L., & Ballon, P. 2013 Open Innovation Processes in Living Lab Innovation Systems: Insights from the LeYLab. Technology Innovation Management Review, (3)11: 28–36. http://timreview.ca/article/743

Schuurman, D. (2015). Bridging the Gap between Open and User Innovation? Exploring the Value of Living Labs as a Means to Structure User Contribution and Manage Distributed Innovation. Doctoral dissertation, Ghent University, Belgium.

Schaffers, H. & Turkama, P. (2012) Living Labs for cross-border systemic innovation, Technology Innovation Management Review, 25–30.

Tranfield, D., Deyen, D., y Smart P. (2003). Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. Advanced Management Research Centre (AMRC). British Journal of Management Cranfield School of Management: Cranfield University.. Vol. (14), p. 207-222.

Westerlund, M., & Leminen, S. 2011. Managing the Challenges of Becoming an Open Innovation Company: Experiences from Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 1(1): 9–25. http://timreview.ca/article/489

Wolfert, J., Verdouw, C. N., Verloop, C. M. & Beulensb, A. J. M. (2010). Organizing information integration in agri-food – A method based on a service-oriented architecture and Living Lab approach, Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 389-405.

Published
2020-01-02
Section
RESEARCH RESULTS ARTICLES

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.