The HSB Living Lab harmonization cube
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/id.55038Keywords:
HSB Living Lab, living lab harmonization cube, innovations, co-creation, co-designAbstract
Living Labs are fast emerging instruments for advancing user-centred innovations in various areas of human activities. Due to their large diversity in terms of thematic approaches, constellations, practices, outcomes and longevity, various methodologies have been proposed to describe and link living labs in a consistent way. The theory has so far seen few applications. The strength of the present work is that it uses an existing and comprehensive methodology, entitled Living Labs Harmonization Cube (LLHC), on a concrete and relevant example – HSB Living Lab. The characterization of HSB Living Lab by LLHC is based on the authors’ personal experience in the design, management and operation of this living lab for the last three years, which is supported by examples. The results show that HSB Living Lab has not yet reached full maturity in any of the six categories included in LLHC and identifies areas for future development.
Downloads
References
(1) ENoLL. (n.d.). Retrieved November 7, 2016, from http://openlivinglabs.eu/
(2) Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., & Chesbrough, H. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: Exploring the phenomenon. R and D Management, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00570.x
(3) European Commission. S3 Theme: Living labs - Smart Specialization Platform. (n.d.). Retrieved November 10, 2016, from http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/living-labs
(4) Climate-KIC. Living Lab Network - Building Technologies Accelerator (BTA). (n.d.). Retrieved December 24, 2016
(5) Bodker, S. (1996). Creating Conditions for Participation: Conflicts and Resources in Systems Development. Human- Computer Interaction, 11(3), 215–236. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci1103_2
(6) Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
(7) Sanders, E. B.-N. (1992). Converging Perspectives: Product Development Research for the 1990s. Design Management Journal, 3(4), 49–54.
(8) Linn, G. (1995). Om arkitekturforskningens fullskalestudier. Nordisk Arkitekturforskning, 3.
(9) Veeckman, C., Schuurman, D., Leminen, S., & Westerlund, M. (2013). Linking Living Lab Characteristics and Their Outcomes: Towards a Conceptual Framework. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3 (December 2013: Living Labs and Crowdsourcing), 6–15.
(10) Bribián, I. Z., Capilla, A. V., Usón, A. A. (2010). Life cycle assessment of building materials: Comparative analysis of energy and environmental impacts and evaluation of the eco-efficiency improvement potential. Building and Environment, 46, 1133-1140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.12.002
(11) IEA (2013). Transition to Sustainable Buildings. Strategies and opportunities to 2050., International Energy Agency.
(12) Capros, P., De Vita, A., Tasios, N., Papadopoulos, D., Siskos, P., et al. (2014). EU Energy,Transport and GHG Emissions Trends to 2050. Publications Office of the European Union.
(13) Mata, E., Medina Benejam, G., Sasic Kalagasidis, A., & Johnsson, F. (2015). Modelling opportunities and costs associated with energy conservation in the Spanish building stock. Energy and Buildings, 88, 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.12.010
(14) Vogel, J. A., Lundqvist, P., & Arias, J. (2015). Categorizing Barriers to Energy Efficiency in Buildings. Energy Procedia, 75, 2839–2845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.568
(15) Shove, E. (1998). Gaps, Barriers and conceptual chasm; theories of technology transfer and energy in buildings. Energy Policy, 26(15), 1105–1112. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(98)00065-2
(16) Slocum, R. (2004). Polar bears and energy-efficient lightbulbs: Strategies to bring climate change home. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 22(3), 413–438. https://doi.org/10.1068/d378
(17) Hargreaves, T., Nye, M., & Burgess, J. (2013). Keeping energy visible? Exploring how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors in the longer term. Energy Policy, 52, 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.03.027
(18) Ingle, A., Moezzi, M., Lutzenhiser, L., & Diamond, R. (2014). Better home energy audit modelling: incorporating inhabitant behaviours. Building Research & Information, 42(4), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.890776
(19) Poulsen, R. T., & Johnson, H. (2016). The logic of business vs. the logic of energy management practice: Understanding the choices and effects of energy consumption monitoring systems in shipping companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 3785–3797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.032
(20) Mulder, I., Velthausz, D., & Kriens, M. (2008). The Living Labs harmonization cube: communicating Living Lab's essentials. The Electronic Journal of Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10 (Special Issue on Living Labs).
(21) Følstad, A. (2008). Living Labs for innovation and development of information and communication technology: a literature review. The Electronic Journal of Virtual Organizations and Networks, 10 (August), 99–131.
(22) Kareborn, B. B., & Stahlbrost, A. (2009). Living Lab: an open and citizen-centric approach for innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(4), 356. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIRD.2009.022727
(23) Leminen, S., Westerlund, M., & Nyström, A. (2012). Living Labs as open-innovation networks. Technology Innovation Management Re, (September), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/602
(24) Ståhlbröst, A., & Holst, M. (2012). The Living Lab Methodology Handbook, 76
(25) Sweden Green Building Council. (n.d.). Miljöbyggnad. Retrieved January 12, 2017, from https://www.sgbc.se/var-verksamhet/ miljoebyggnad
(26) Boverket. (n.d.) Boverkets byggregler – föreskrifter och allmänna råd BBR. BFS 2011:6 med ändringar till och med BFS 2016:13. Retreived January 12, 2017 from www.boverket.se
(27) Schumacher, J. (2011). Alcotra Innovation project : Living Labs Definition, Harmonization Cube Indicators, 1–24.
(28) SusLab. (2011). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from http://suslab.eu/home/
(29) Homes for tomorrow. (2011). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from http://www.homesfortomorrow.se/about
(30) Scott, K., Bakker, C., & Quist, J. (2012). Designing change by living change. Design Studies, 33(3), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.08.002
(31) Hagy, S., & Balay, P. (2014). Adaptable Design for the HSB Living Lab. MSc thesis. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
(32) International Energy Agency (IEA). (2013). Technology Roadmap. Energy efficent building envelopes. Oecd, 68.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
