LIVING LABS AS INFRASTRUCTURES FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION AND INNOVATION
LIVING LABS AS INFRASTRUCTURES FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION AND INNOVATION
How Socio-Technical Complexity Requires New Spaces for Applied Research and Systemic Learning
Author: Monica Bianco, Ecosystems Cooperation advisor -CRF Italy
Abstract
In a context increasingly dominated by systemic crises, societal challenges, and fragmented innovation landscapes, Living Labs emerge as crucial infrastructures for reconnecting research, innovation, and territorial development. Rooted in the principles of co-creation, experimentation, and territorial anchoring, Living Labs provide the socio-technical environments necessary to transform the complexity of real-world problems into collaborative opportunities for action. This article explores the role of Living Labs in operationalizing impact-oriented research, reducing systemic complexity, and fostering cultural transformation within research ecosystems. Drawing on European Commission frameworks and the experience of the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL), we argue that Living Labs must be recognized as strategic infrastructures for territorial resilience and cooperative innovation.
Introduction: Complexity, Crisis, and the Need for New Infrastructures
The contemporary landscape of innovation and societal development is characterized by escalating complexity. Technological transitions, ecological imperatives, and social inequalities interact in unpredictable ways, producing what Rittel and Webber (1973) famously called “wicked problems” [1].
In such a context, traditional disciplinary research structures and top-down innovation models prove insufficient. Complex socio-technical systems cannot be governed through linear approaches; they require spaces for iteration, negotiation, and collective intelligence.
As the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (2022) emphasizes, territorial innovation ecosystems must be “place-based, mission-driven, and grounded in collaborative infrastructures capable of handling systemic complexity” [2]. Living Labs are precisely such infrastructures: spaces where complexity is not denied but embraced and made governable through collaborative design and adaptive experimentation.
Living Labs: Concept and Evolution
Living Labs, as formalized by the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL), are defined as “user-centered, open innovation ecosystems based on a systematic co-creation approach integrating research and innovation processes in real-life communities and settings” [3].
Initially conceptualized to bridge the gap between research and society, Living Labs have evolved into strategic platforms for multi-stakeholder engagement, participatory prototyping, and mission-oriented innovation. They operate at the intersection of academic knowledge, technological development, policy agendas, and societal aspirations, thus embodying the systemic integration demanded by impact-oriented research.
From Research to Impact: The Role of Living Labs
Impact-oriented research requires more than methodological rigor; it demands social embeddedness, territorial relevance, and iterative learning cycles. Living Labs provide the operational environment where research moves from disciplinary abstraction to societal co-creation.
Through Living Labs, projects become iterative experiments, policies are prototyped rather than imposed, and technologies are adapted rather than transferred. This transition from a “knowledge-push” to a “problem-pull” dynamic is crucial for ensuring that research produces outcomes that are not only scientifically valid but also socially meaningful and territorially sustainable.
Living Labs as Instruments of Complexity Reduction
One of the less explored but fundamental roles of Living Labs is their function as instruments for the reduction of systemic complexity.
In environments where the interaction between actors, technologies, and contexts generates overwhelming complexity, Living Labs serve as “boundary infrastructures” — physical and conceptual spaces that selectively reduce complexity by focusing attention, enabling negotiation, and structuring adaptive experimentation.
In this sense, Living Labs can be seen as filters, amplifiers, and negotiation arenas that make systemic complexity actionable.
They transform the “hypercomplex” into the “manageable-complex” through processes of co-design, real-world testing, and dynamic stakeholder alignment.
Moreover, Living Labs act as social orientation devices. They offer actors — researchers, enterprises, policymakers, citizens — a shared space to redefine their roles, expectations, and collaboration modalities.
This social function is crucial, as it enables cultural transformations necessary for cooperative innovation: the overcoming of academic arrogance, the valorization of practical knowledge, and the re-centering of research around problem-solving rather than prestige accumulation.
The European Vision: Living Labs for the Green and Digital Transitions
The European Commission’s strategies for the Green Deal and Digital Europe explicitly recognize the need for participatory, territorialized innovation ecosystems.
Living Labs are highlighted as key infrastructures to achieve mission-driven innovation, citizen engagement, and place-based transitions [2].
Several European initiatives — such as the Urban Agenda partnerships, the Climate-Neutral Cities Mission, and the European Bauhaus — explicitly deploy Living Lab methodologies to integrate top-down strategies with bottom-up experimentation. As ENoLL states in its 2022 Annual Report, “Living Labs are not simply innovation spaces; they are platforms for societal learning, adaptive governance, and territorial regeneration” [3].
Toward a Living Lab Ecosystem for Regional Resilience
To fully realize their potential, Living Labs must evolve from isolated experiments to interconnected infrastructures embedded within regional innovation strategies. Their functions must expand beyond single projects to include:
- Structuring systemic learning across sectors and scales.
- Bridging gaps between research, enterprises, public authorities, and communities.
- Anchoring mission-driven innovation within territorial realities.
- Acting as long-term platforms for the regeneration of resilience, inclusiveness, and sustainability.
Regional networks of Living Labs, cooperating across borders and sectors, could form the backbone of a new Euro-Mediterranean strategy for impact-oriented, engineering-driven research and innovation — capable of transforming the Mediterranean from a frontier of vulnerability into a laboratory of cooperative regeneration.
Conclusion: Living Labs as the Operational Soul of Impact-Oriented Research
Living Labs are not just tools for improving technology transfer or citizen engagement. They represent a deeper shift: the move from an academic culture centered on disciplinary excellence to a projectual culture centered on systemic problem-solving and territorial impact.
In an era where complexity threatens to paralyze action, Living Labs offer the operational structures, the cultural frameworks, and the adaptive methodologies needed to govern complexity without denying it.
Recognizing, supporting, and expanding Living Labs is not a marginal option; it is a strategic necessity for any society serious about making research serve its people, its territories, and its futures.
References
- Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
- European Commission, Joint Research Centre (2022). Place-Based Innovation Ecosystems: Key Actors and Practices for Territorial Transformation. JRC Science for Policy Report.
- European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). (2022). Annual Report: Living Labs for a Sustainable Future.
- EC Mission Board for Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities (2020). 100 Climate-Neutral Cities by 2030 – by and for the Citizens. European Commission.
- OECD (2023). Living Labs and Territorial Innovation. OECD Publishing.
