IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v77y2024ics0160791x24001222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards setting a standard for evaluating living labs with case studies in Turkiye

Author

Listed:
  • Yilmaz, Ozge Celik
  • Ertekin, Ozhan

Abstract

The article highlights the significance of understanding success criteria by gathering data from key stakeholders associated with Basaksehir Living Lab, Bodrum Living Lab and Mezopotamya Living Lab via the in-depth interview method. These interviews aim to gain insights into how these living labs have addressed and incorporated the identified success criteria within their initiatives and to understand the impact and outcomes they have achieved in their respective contexts. The interviews reveal valuable insights and lessons learned that could inform the design and implementation of future lab initiatives. Furthermore, the findings contribute to the existing knowledge base on ULLs, shedding light on their potential to address urban challenges, foster collaboration, and drive sustainable urban development. However, there is a literature gap in terms of a comprehensive understanding of the success criteria specific to ULLs, which hinders the effective utilization of ULLs as platforms for addressing urban challenges. The conclusions drawn from the article emphasize the need for further examination of these labs' openness, user empowerment, and transferability criteria. Nevertheless, the article contributes to understanding the success criteria of ULLs and provides insights for future research and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Yilmaz, Ozge Celik & Ertekin, Ozhan, 2024. "Towards setting a standard for evaluating living labs with case studies in Turkiye," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:77:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x24001222
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24001222
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102574?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nathalie Haug & Ines Mergel, 2021. "Public Value Co-Creation in Living Labs—Results from Three Case Studies," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Sphokazi Phelokazi Mbatha & Josephine Kaviti Musango, 2022. "A Systematic Review on the Application of the Living Lab Concept and Role of Stakeholders in the Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Nguyen, Huong Thu & Marques, Pilar & Benneworth, Paul, 2022. "Living labs: Challenging and changing the smart city power relations?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    4. Agatino Rizzo & Abdolrasoul Habibipour & Anna Ståhlbröst, 2021. "Transformative thinking and urban living labs in planning practice: a critical review and ongoing case studies in Europe," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(10), pages 1739-1757, October.
    5. Carina Veeckman & Laura Temmerman, 2021. "Urban Living Labs and Citizen Science: From Innovation and Science towards Policy Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, January.
    6. Ozge Celik Yilmaz & Ozhan Ertekin, 2022. "A New Era for Urban Actors," International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), IGI Global, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Darren Sharp & Robert Salter, 2017. "Direct Impacts of an Urban Living Lab from the Participants’ Perspective: Livewell Yarra," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, September.
    8. Pettersson, Fredrik & Westerdahl, Stig & Hansson, Joel, 2018. "Learning through collaboration in the Swedish public transport sector? Co-production through guidelines and living labs," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 394-401.
    9. Inés Aquilué & Angélica Caicedo & Joan Moreno & Miquel Estrada & Laia Pagès, 2021. "A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Living Labs on Urban Design: The Case of the Furnish Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    10. Shahryar Sarabi & Qi Han & A. Georges L. Romme & Bauke de Vries & Rianne Valkenburg & Elke den Ouden & Spela Zalokar & Laura Wendling, 2021. "Barriers to the Adoption of Urban Living Labs for NBS Implementation: A Systemic Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    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. Erick Elysio Reis Amorim & Monique Menezes & Karoline Vitória Gonçalves Fernandes, 2022. "Urban Living Labs and Critical Infrastructure Resilience: A Global Match?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Abi Saad, Elie & Agogué, Marine, 2024. "Living Labs in science-industry collaborations: Roles, design, and application patterns," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    3. Doina Petrescu & Helena Cermeño & Carsten Keller & Carola Moujan & Andrew Belfield & Florian Koch & Denise Goff & Meike Schalk & Floris Bernhardt, 2022. "Sharing and Space-Commoning Knowledge Through Urban Living Labs Across Different European Cities," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 254-273.
    4. Hacer Tercanli & Ben Jongbloed, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Literature on Living Labs in Higher Education Institutions: Potentials and Constraints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, September.
    5. Jose Manuel Diaz‐Sarachaga & Francisco José Moreno Sánchez‐Cañete, 2024. "Boosting the Spanish Urban Agenda through urban living labs: The case study of Madrid," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), pages 5019-5030, October.
    6. Cecilie Sachs Olsen & Merlijn van Hulst, 2024. "Reimagining Urban Living Labs: Enter the Urban Drama Lab," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(6), pages 991-1012, May.
    7. Xiaodong Chen & Anda Guo & Jiahao Zhu & Fang Wang & Yanqiu He, 2022. "Accessing performance of transport sector considering risks of climate change and traffic accidents: joint bounded-adjusted measure and Luenberger decomposition," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 111(1), pages 115-138, March.
    8. Fatima Canseco-Lopez & Artur Serra & Marta Martorell Camps, 2025. "Opening Our Innovation Ecosystems to All: The INTEGER Project Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Darren Sierhuis & Luca Bertolini & Willem Van Winden, 2024. "“Recovering†the political: Unpacking the implications of (de)politicization for the transformative capacities of urban experiments," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 42(2), pages 303-321, March.
    10. Maria Cerreta & Gaia Daldanise & Ludovica La Rocca & Simona Panaro, 2021. "Triggering Active Communities for Cultural Creative Cities: The “Hack the City” Play ReCH Mission in the Salerno Historic Centre (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, October.
    11. Daniel G. Costa & João Carlos N. Bittencourt & Franklin Oliveira & João Paulo Just Peixoto & Thiago C. Jesus, 2024. "Achieving Sustainable Smart Cities through Geospatial Data-Driven Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-30, January.
    12. Fedoua Kasmi & Ferney Osorio & Laurent Dupont & Brunelle Marche & Mauricio Camargo, 2022. "Innovation Spaces as Drivers of Eco-innovations Supporting the Circular Economy: A Systematic Literature Review," Post-Print hal-03590438, HAL.
    13. Paola Piazza & Nadia Ursino, 2023. "On the Reason to Implement a Sustainable Urban Drainage Nature-Based Solution to Decrease Flood Threat: A Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-13, June.
    14. Darren Sharp & Rob Raven, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 195-207.
    15. Ozge CELIK YILMAZ & Ozhan ERTEKIN, 2023. "Urban Living Labs As A Tool To Achieve Sustainable Development Goal 16: A Case Study Of Istanbul, Turkiye," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 18(3), pages 88-118, August.
    16. Bushell, James & Merkert, Rico & Beck, Matthew J., 2022. "Consumer preferences for operator collaboration in intra- and intercity transport ecosystems: Institutionalising platforms to facilitate MaaS 2.0," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 160-178.
    17. Fabiano Lemes de Oliveira & Maria do Carmo de Lima Bezerra & Orlando Vinicius Rangel Nunes & Enzo D’Angelo Arruda Duarte & Anna Giulia Castaldo & Davi Navarro de Almeida, 2025. "Nature-Based Solutions for Stormwater Management: Co-Creating a Multiscalar Proposal in the Global South," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-23, March.
    18. Beatriz Kauark-Fontes & César E. Ortiz-Guerrero & Livia Marchetti & Jaime Hernández-Garcia & Fabio Salbitano, 2023. "Towards Adaptive Governance of Urban Nature-Based Solutions in Europe and Latin America—A Qualitative Exploratory Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, March.
    19. Nicola Stocco & Francesco Gardona & Fulvio Biddau & Paolo Francesco Cottone, 2021. "Learning Processes and Agency in the Decarbonization Context: A Systematic Review through a Cultural Psychology Point of View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-31, September.
    20. Terence Fell & Tove Rydenstam & Benti Geleta Buli & Abby C. King & Katarina Bälter, 2021. "Citizen Science in Sweden’s Stigmatized Neighborhoods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-22, September.

    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:eee:teinso:v:77:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x24001222. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.