IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i16p9826-d884085.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban Living Labs and Critical Infrastructure Resilience: A Global Match?

Author

Listed:
  • Erick Elysio Reis Amorim

    (Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration, Getúlio Vargas Foundation, Rio de Janeiro 22231-010, RJ, Brazil
    Center for Efficiency in Urban Sustainability, Federal University of Piauí, Teresina 64048-500, PI, Brazil)

  • Monique Menezes

    (Center for Efficiency in Urban Sustainability, Federal University of Piauí, Teresina 64048-500, PI, Brazil
    Department of Political Science, Federal University of Piauí, Teresina 64048-500, PI, Brazil)

  • Karoline Vitória Gonçalves Fernandes

    (Center for Efficiency in Urban Sustainability, Federal University of Piauí, Teresina 64048-500, PI, Brazil)

Abstract

The challenges to public policy brought by climate change are some of the biggest challenges for cities around the world. These challenges are costlier and more substantial for low-income communities given the existence of their greater social and economic vulnerability. Among the existing tools, this paper highlights the role played by urban living labs (ULLs), which have been discussed in the literature as a booster of urban resilience in a more sustainable direction. By considering ULLs as strategic institutional arrangements that seek resilience for the critical urban infrastructure challenges of climate change, the main target of this paper is to analyze ULLs as a strategy for increasing critical infrastructure resilience in the region of the Global South. These labs were initiated in developed countries, so we can ask: How are developing countries adapting this strategy in order to mitigate the problems of climate change? To achieve this goal, we reviewed previous literature on ULLs, specifically looking for case studies with ULL projects and highlighting the processes of public innovation policies and transfers of knowledge between countries; in order to complement our empirical analysis, we carried out a case study on Brazil. Despite the limitations of the sample, the data suggest the existence of different barriers to the implementation of ULL projects in Brazil compared to those in European cities.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:16:p:9826-:d:884085
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/9826/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/9826/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Annica Kronsell & Dalia Mukhtar-Landgren, 2018. "Experimental governance: the role of municipalities in urban living labs," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(5), pages 988-1007, May.
    4. Marcin Dąbrowski & Viktor Varjú & Libera Amenta, 2019. "Transferring Circular Economy Solutions across Differentiated Territories: Understanding and Overcoming the Barriers for Knowledge Transfer," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 52-62.
    5. Adriano Tanda & Alberto De Marco, 2021. "A Review of an Urban Living Lab Initiative," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 370-390, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Anil Engez & Seppo Leminen & Leena Aarikka-Stenroos, 2021. "Urban Living Lab as a Circular Economy Ecosystem: Advancing Environmental Sustainability through Economic Value, Material, and Knowledge Flows," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Jochen Monstadt & Martin Schmidt, 2019. "Urban resilience in the making? The governance of critical infrastructures in German cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(11), pages 2353-2371, August.
    9. Andrews, Matt & Pritchett, Lant & Woolcock, Michael, 2017. "Building State Capability: Evidence, Analysis, Action," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198747482.
    10. Libera Amenta & Arjan Van Timmeren, 2018. "Beyond Wastescapes: Towards Circular Landscapes. Addressing the Spatial Dimension of Circularity through the Regeneration of Wastescapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Katharina Greve & Riccardo De Vita & Seppo Leminen & Mika Westerlund, 2021. "Living Labs: From Niche to Mainstream Innovation Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, January.
    12. Libera Amenta & Anna Attademo & Hilde Remøy & Gilda Berruti & Maria Cerreta & Enrico Formato & Maria Federica Palestino & Michelangelo Russo, 2019. "Managing the Transition towards Circular Metabolism: Living Labs as a Co-Creation Approach," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 5-18.
    13. 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.
    14. 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. Diego Hernando Florez Ayala & Anete Alberton & Aksel Ersoy, 2022. "Urban Living Labs: Pathways of Sustainability Transitions towards Innovative City Systems from a Circular Economy Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-29, August.
    2. Dimitri Schuurman & Seppo Leminen, 2021. "Living Labs Past Achievements, Current Developments, and Future Trajectories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-6, September.
    3. Libera Amenta & Lei Qu, 2020. "Experimenting with Circularity When Designing Contemporary Regions: Adaptation Strategies for More Resilient and Regenerative Metropolitan Areas of Amsterdam and Naples Developed in University Studio ," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, June.
    4. Hilde Remøy & Alexander Wandl & Denis Ceric & Arjan van Timmeren, 2019. "Facilitating Circular Economy in Urban Planning," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 1-4.
    5. 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.
    6. Fredrik Envall, 2023. "Situated dynamics of environmental governance in Swedish smart energy experimentation: Tentativeness, demonstration, upscaling," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(5), pages 922-940, August.
    7. Maria Cerreta & Chiara Mazzarella & Martina Spiezia & Maria Rosaria Tramontano, 2020. "Regenerativescapes: Incremental Evaluation for the Regeneration of Unresolved Territories in East Naples," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-23, August.
    8. Bartosz Piziak & Magdalena Bień & Wojciech Jarczewski & Katarzyna Ner, 2023. "Exploring Urban (Living) Labs: A Model Tailored for Central and Eastern Europe’s Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Aihua Zhu & Samah Ali Mohsen Mofreh & Sultan Salem, 2023. "The Application of Language Proficiency Scales in Education Context: A Systematic Literature Review," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    10. Khalid Ahmed Al-Ansari & Ahmet Faruk Aysan, 2021. "More than ten years of Blockchain creation: How did we use the technology and which direction is the research heading? [Plus de dix ans de création Blockchain : Comment avons-nous utilisé la techno," Working Papers hal-03343048, HAL.
    11. Federico Cuomo & Stefania Ravazzi & Federico Savini & Luca Bertolini, 2020. "Transformative Urban Living Labs: Towards a Circular Economy in Amsterdam and Turin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-19, September.
    12. Qi Mu & Fabrizio Aimar, 2022. "How Are Historical Villages Changed? A Systematic Literature Review on European and Chinese Cultural Heritage Preservation Practices in Rural Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, June.
    13. Adams, Clare & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Moglia, Magnus, 2023. "Mainstreaming nature-based solutions in cities: A systematic literature review and a proposal for facilitating urban transitions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    14. Luciana Cingolani & Tim Hildebrandt, 2022. "Incentive Structures for the Adoption of Crowdsourcing in Public Policy: A Bureaucratic Politics Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.
    15. Alice Evans, 2019. "Incentivising Pro-Labour Reforms," CID Working Papers 349, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    16. Rui Liang & Xichuan Zheng & Po-Hsun Wang & Jia Liang & Linhui Hu, 2023. "Research Progress of Carbon-Neutral Design for Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-50, August.
    17. Bertha Leticia Treviño-Elizondo & Heriberto García-Reyes & Rodrigo E. Peimbert-García, 2023. "A Maturity Model to Become a Smart Organization Based on Lean and Industry 4.0 Synergy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-24, September.
    18. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.
    19. Sultan Çetin & Catherine De Wolf & Nancy Bocken, 2021. "Circular Digital Built Environment: An Emerging Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-34, June.
    20. Daniel Caballero-Julia & Philippe Campillo, 2021. "Epistemological Considerations of Text Mining: Implications for Systematic Literature Review," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-26, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:16:p:9826-:d:884085. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.