IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i16p7197-d1720785.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-Creating Sustainability Interventions in Practice—Coping with Constitutive Challenges of Transdisciplinary Collaboration in Living Labs

Author

Listed:
  • Werner König

    (REZ–Reutlingen Energy Center for Distributed Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency, Reutlingen University, 72762 Reutlingen, Germany)

  • Lisa Schwarz

    (REZ–Reutlingen Energy Center for Distributed Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency, Reutlingen University, 72762 Reutlingen, Germany)

  • Sabine Löbbe

    (REZ–Reutlingen Energy Center for Distributed Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency, Reutlingen University, 72762 Reutlingen, Germany)

Abstract

Sustainability research in Living Labs promises innovation through real-world experimentation. These settings require the integration of key design principles—such as participation, co-creation, and real-life application—into everyday research. Yet collaboration among diverse actors is often accompanied by persistent tensions and conflicts. This study examines a Living Lab project embedded in the net-zero transformation of a corporate city. It focuses on identifying and explaining key challenges in the daily collaboration between academic and non-academic actors, as well as the strategies used to cope with them. Following a qualitative approach, data were generated through twenty in-depth interviews and participant observations. We identify uncertainties, frustrations, overload, tensions, conflicts, and disengagement as recurring reactions in transdisciplinary collaboration. These are traced back to the following five underlying proto-challenges: (1) divergent interpretations of Living Lab concepts, (2) conflicting views on sustainability interventions, (3) difficulties in role positioning, (4) processes of instrumentalisation and over-identification, and (5) the embedded complexities of Living Lab governance. By linking these findings to Institutional Theory and Paradox Theory, we argue that the proto-challenges are not merely contingent barriers but constitutive tensions—implicitly inscribed into the normative design of Living Lab research and essential to engage with for advancing collaborative sustainability efforts.

Suggested Citation

  • Werner König & Lisa Schwarz & Sabine Löbbe, 2025. "Co-Creating Sustainability Interventions in Practice—Coping with Constitutive Challenges of Transdisciplinary Collaboration in Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-25, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:16:p:7197-:d:1720785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/16/7197/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/16/7197/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    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. Ignacio Farías & Anders Blok, 2016. "Technical democracy as a challenge to urban studies," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 539-548, July.
    4. Patrik Thollander & Jenny Palm & Johan Hedbrant, 2019. "Energy Efficiency as a Wicked Problem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-11, March.
    5. Sengers, Frans & Wieczorek, Anna J. & Raven, Rob, 2019. "Experimenting for sustainability transitions: A systematic literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 153-164.
    6. Sabine Maasen & Olivier Lieven, 2006. "Transdisciplinarity: a new mode of governing science?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 399-410, July.
    7. Laurens K. Hessels & Stefan P.L. De Jong & Stijn Brouwer, 2018. "Collaboration between Heterogeneous Practitioners in Sustainability Research: A Comparative Analysis of Three Transdisciplinary Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Grzegorz Baran & Aleksandra Berkowicz, 2020. "Sustainability Living Labs as a Methodological Approach to Research on the Cultural Drivers of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-16, June.
    9. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    10. Andrew Karvonen & Bas Heur, 2014. "Urban Laboratories: Experiments in Reworking Cities," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 379-392, March.
    11. Engels, Franziska & Rogge, Jan-Christoph, 2018. "Tensions and Trade-offs in Real-World Laboratories – The Participants' Perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(Supplemen), pages 28-31.
    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. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    2. Frans Sengers & Alexander Peine, 2021. "Innovation Pathways for Age-Friendly Homes in Europe," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-25, January.
    3. Shrestha, Subina & Haarstad, Håvard & Rauws, Ward & Buijs, Paul, 2025. "From experiments to organizational change: Learning from urban logistics projects in Groningen and Bergen," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    4. Waes, Arnoud van & Nikolaeva, Anna & Raven, Rob, 2021. "Challenges and dilemmas in strategic urban experimentationAn analysis of four cycling innovation living labs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    5. Marina Knickel & Karlheinz Knickel & Francesca Galli & Damian Maye & Johannes S. C. Wiskerke, 2019. "Towards a Reflexive Framework for Fostering Co—Learning and Improvement of Transdisciplinary Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    6. Gloria Rose & Mirjam Stocker & Michael Ornetzeder, 2022. "The Learning City: Temporary Housing Projects as Urban Niches for Sustainability Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, April.
    7. Marianne Ryghaug & Michael Ornetzeder & Tomas Moe Skjølsvold & William Throndsen, 2019. "The Role of Experiments and Demonstration Projects in Efforts of Upscaling: An Analysis of Two Projects Attempting to Reconfigure Production and Consumption in Energy and Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-15, October.
    8. Bach Quang Ho & Yuki Inoue, 2020. "Driving Network Externalities in Education for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Julia Maria Wittmayer & Tessa de Geus & Bonno Pel & F. Avelino & Sabine Hielscher & Thomas Hoppe & Marie Susan Mühlemeier & Agata Stasik & Sem Oxenaar & Karoline K.S. Rogge & Vivian Visser & Esther Ma, 2020. "Beyond instrumentalism: Broadening the understanding of social innovation in socio-technical energy systems," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/312323, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Anthony McLean & Harriet Bulkeley & Mike Crang, 2016. "Negotiating the urban smart grid: Socio-technical experimentation in the city of Austin," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(15), pages 3246-3263, November.
    12. Pijpers, Kevin, 2024. "Urban Living Labs in times of post-pandemic epistemic injustices: a speculative realist revision," SocArXiv rh6fc, Center for Open Science.
    13. Aksel Ersoy & Ellen van Bueren, 2020. "Challenges of Urban Living Labs towards the Future of Local Innovation," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(4), pages 89-100.
    14. Natalie A Jones & Pascal Perez & Thomas G Measham & Gail J Kelly & Patrick D’Aquino & Katherine Daniell & Anne Dray & Nils Ferrand, 2008. "Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    15. Evans, Joshua & Collins, Damian & Anderson, Jalene, 2016. "Homelessness, bedspace and the case for Housing First in Canada," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 249-256.
    16. Matthew Thompson & Vicky Nowak & Alan Southern & Jackie Davies & Peter Furmedge, 2020. "Re-grounding the city with Polanyi: From urban entrepreneurialism to entrepreneurial municipalism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(6), pages 1171-1194, September.
    17. Archana Mishra & Lance Newey & Paul Spee, 2025. "Greatest Good for the Greatest Number – the Role of Managers’ Ethical Meaning-Making and Subjective Wellbeing Complexity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 197(3), pages 557-579, March.
    18. Elena Bakhanova & Jaime A. Garcia & William L. Raffe & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "Gamification Framework for Participatory Modeling: A Proposal," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1167-1182, October.
    19. Wang, Xiaojun & Zhang, Shukai & Schneider, Niels, 2021. "Evaluating the carbon emissions of alternative food provision systems: A comparative analysis of recipe box and supermarket equivalents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Nesari, Mohammad & Naghizadeh, Mohammad & Ghazinoori, Soroush & Manteghi, Manoochehr, 2022. "The evolution of socio-technical transition studies: A scientometric analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:17:y:2025:i:16:p:7197-:d:1720785. 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.