Living Lab
Introduction
Key characteristics
Open Innovation Ecosystems
- Living Labs are described as open innovation ecosystems that involve stakeholders in every part of the research and innovation process.
- These ecosystems differentiate themselves by incorporating real-life experimentation and research in real-life settings with actual participants.
Stakeholder Involvement
- A significant characteristic of Living Labs is the involvement of stakeholders not just as advisors but as equal partners in the research and innovation activities.
- This includes a wide range of participants such as citizens, public and private sectors, and academia, reflecting the quadruple helix model.
User-Centered Approach
- Active Participation: Users are deeply involved in the innovation process, contributing ideas, feedback, and evaluations.
- Empowerment: Users are empowered to influence outcomes, ensuring that solutions are relevant and acceptable to the target audience
Real-Life Environment
- Natural Settings: Innovations are tested in the environments where they will ultimately be used (e.g., homes, communities, workplaces).
- Contextual Understanding: This approach captures the complexities of real-world usage, including environmental factors and user behaviors.
Co-Creation and Collaboration
- Multi-Stakeholder Engagement: Collaboration between businesses, researchers, users, and policymakers to leverage diverse expertise.
- Shared Knowledge: Open exchange of information and ideas to stimulate creativity and innovation.
Public-Private-People Partnerships (PPPP)
- Integrated Efforts: Combines resources and capabilities from various sectors to address common goals.
- Collective Impact: Aims for solutions that benefit society as a whole, not just individual organisations.
Methodological aspects
The living lab methodology starts with an idea, which is then developed into a prototype. This prototype is implemented in the community to test its effectiveness. After the initial implementation, learnings from the prototype are gathered. These learnings influence the next iteration, leading to continuous improvement. This cycle of prototyping, implementing, learning, and iterating is repeated to refine the approach. Unlike traditional research frameworks, the living lab methodology is not rigid. It allows for experimentation and adaptation based on real-time feedback from the community. This flexibility enables the methodology to be more responsive to the needs and dynamics of the community. The methodology involves engaging with community members and stakeholders throughout the process. This engagement helps in understanding the community’s preferences, attitudes, and perceptions, which are crucial for refining the prototype.
3 phases of the living lab
1 Ideation
- Needs Assessment: Identifying challenges and opportunities through user engagement and data analysis.
- Brainstorming Sessions: Generating ideas collaboratively with stakeholders
Ideation in Cancer-Focused Living Labs: Key Starting Points
The ideation phase in a Living Lab is about moving from broad challenges to concrete ideas. In the cancer context, this means exploring potential solutions to real-world issues—whether in prevention, early detection, treatment, or survivorship—through collaborative thinking.
Start with clarity:
Identify the cancer-related challenge your LL aims to address (e.g., low screening uptake, inequalities in care). Define early objectives to guide the direction of your ideas.
Understand your environment:
Conduct a context analysis to better understand local realities—barriers, needs, opportunities, and resources. This ensures ideas are grounded and relevant to your target groups.
Identify key players:
Map out who needs to be involved from the beginning—patients, healthcare providers, researchers, community leaders, policymakers. Tools like the power-interest matrix or salience model (see Toolbox) can help.
Foster co-creation:
Choose methods that invite diverse perspectives and empower stakeholders to contribute ideas—not just react to them. Use the engagement ladder to guide the depth of involvement, from informing to empowering.
Set a shared direction:
Outline a first draft of your Living Lab’s vision, values, and focus. These will evolve, but they provide a starting point for further co-development—especially during early meetings and workshops.
2 Prototyping
- Concept Development: Transforming ideas into tangible prototypes or models.
- User Testing/ Feedback loops: Present prototypes to the community and other stakeholders to gather input and make necessary adjustments.
- Prototype Development: Create preliminary models of interventions, such as educational programs or screening tools.
3 Testing
- Pilot Projects: Implementing prototypes in real-life settings to observe performance and user interaction.
- Data Collection: Gathering quantitative and qualitative data to assess effectiveness.
- Assess Effectiveness: Measure outcomes and community impact.
- Ensure Sustainability: Develop long-term strategies and integrate findings into public health policies.
- Expand and Scale Up: If successful, adapt and implement the intervention in broader contexts.
Some examples in the field of Cancer
The 4P-CAN project employs the Living Lab methodology to actively engage citizens in cancer prevention and healthy lifestyle promotion. Two regional Living Labs have been established: one in South-Muntenia, Romania, and another in Plovdiv, Bulgaria. These labs provide platforms for citizens to share their attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors related to cancer prevention. The initiative emphasizes the role of citizens as agents of change, fostering community-driven approaches to health improvement. 4p-can.eu In the Romanian Living Lab, a mixed-methods research approach is utilized, gathering data from approximately 200 individuals through quantitative questionnaires and qualitative interviews. This data collection aims to understand the effects of social factors on health habits and to develop effective cancer prevention strategies.
Similarly, the Living Lab in Bulgaria applies the same methodology, focusing on health-related environmental factors such as air quality and radon exposure. Digital technologies are employed for dynamic air quality measurement and real-time radon level monitoring. The collected environmental data is then correlated with participants’ health-related attitudes, behaviors, and social-network patterns.
Additionally, the PECan (Partners of Experience in Cancer) initiative is a patient-led Living Lab that empowers patients and caregivers to lead agenda-setting and drive research and innovation in oncology care. This initiative highlights the transformative potential of Living Labs in patient advocacy and primary cancer prevention.
RESOURCE: Check a policy brief titled The Manifesto of the Oncology Focused Living Labs written by several projects and organisations working with living labs, including lifechamps
Challenges & Considerations
.
Challenges
Complex Coordination: Managing diverse stakeholder interests requires robust governance structures.
⇒ Example: Cancer is seen as a sensitive issue, often associated only with clinical research. The broader scope of cancer research, including prevention and quality of life, can benefit from the Living Labs approach.
Resource Intensiveness: Needs significant investment in time, funding, and human capital.
⇒ Example: The maturity of implementing Living Labs varies across countries, influenced by local contexts and available resources. There is a need for adaptable methods to fit different local contexts.
Ethical and Privacy Concerns: Must ensure data protection and ethical treatment of participant information.
Scalability: Solutions developed in specific contexts may face challenges when expanded to different settings
Considerations
Inclusiveness in Practice:
- Engaging vulnerable populations, such as older adults and those in rural areas, remains a challenge; Living Labs must develop methods to include these groups effectively.
-
- Example: In the LifeChamps project, involving older cancer survivors and ensuring their participation in technology adoption was key.
- Example: In PECAN, involving cancer patients directly in the research process to address their specific needs and challenges.
Benefits
Benefits of Living Labs:
- Relevance and Suitability: Solutions are tailored to actual user needs, increasing effectiveness.
- Accelerated Learning: Real-time feedback enables quick identification of what works and what doesn’t.
- Cost Reduction: Early detection of issues can save resources by preventing investment in ineffective solutions.
- Community Building: Strengthens relationships among stakeholders, fostering a sense of ownership and collaboration.
- Inclusiveness: Living Labs can engage vulnerable populations and ensure their voices are heard, promoting inclusiveness in research and innovation.
Success factors
Success Factors:
- Strong Leadership and Facilitation: Effective management to guide the process and mediate among stakeholders.
- Clear Objectives and Metrics: Well-defined goals and success criteria to evaluate progress.
- Flexible Methodologies: Ability to adapt methods and approaches based on emerging insights.
- Stakeholder Commitment: Sustained engagement and investment from all parties involved.
Practical Considerations (gathered from the expert interviews, uploaded soon in the interview section)
- Ethical Practices: Ensure compliance with ethical standards, particularly regarding data privacy and informed consent.
- Cultural Sensitivity: Tailor interventions to align with the cultural contexts and values of the target community.
- Communication: Maintain transparent and open communication among all stakeholders throughout the process.
- Flexibility: Be prepared to adapt interventions based on ongoing feedback and changing community dynamics.
Benefits, success factors and practical considerations