Future-proof living labs
In the tourism and leisure industry, more frequently structures are created to bring education, entrepreneurs and governments together in a triple-helix context. The goal is to develop productive coalitions to enhance the industry. Commissioned by CELTH and Tourism Alliance Fryslân (TAF), we compared living labs by focusing on the similarities and differences between 27 living labs in the Netherlands. We undertake this task together with HZ University. As a result, we offer insight into the opportunities and threats for the upscaling of existing and future living lab constructions.
Results
- The most important success factor is the involvement of the stakeholders in the living lab
- Value creation for all stakeholders, the degree of end-user involvement, making use of diversity, combining work and learning, creating a (professional) organisation, alignment with the environment and the creation of a learning community are all positively related to the success of a living lab
- A prior knowledge agenda and the number of students and teachers involved are also important for the success of the living lab
- The failure factors are actually the reverse of the success factors: a lack of involvement and participation and unstable funding
Benefits
- Overview of similarities and differences in the success factors and failure factors of living labs
- Insight into the start-up and establishment, growth/upscaling and creating a sustainable organisation form of living labs
- Initiators of living labs can make their ideas concrete by means of the gained knowledge
