Methodology for the Open Living Lab process

This project is implemented through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme co-financed by the ERDF.

Methodology for the Open Living Lab process

Bologna 21st October 2013Giuseppe Luppino

O4.1.7 Final version


Link OLL to airLED• A LIVING LAB is a real life environment in which

researchers, developers and users create together new products or services, through an open collaboration which leads to local and global innovation

• A Living Lab in airLED– Support pilot implementation– Support policy development


Different stakeholders for the same OLLThe general structure of a Living Lab influences the relationship between stakeholders and also the weights are very different. In particular there are 4 types of subjects which are interested in the creation of an OLL and for different reasons with different involvement of the stakeholders

Utilizer: Utilizers are companies that launch and promote the living lab, in order to develop and test firm products and services. They use the living lab as a strategic tool to collect data on users or user communities of their products or services.

Enabler: Enablers include various public-sector actors, non-governmental organizations, and financiers, such as towns, municipalities, or area-development organisations. Living labs are public-sectors project with the aim at developing a specific region or city area in terms of reducing unemployment or solving social and structural problems.

Provider: Provider-driven emphasize efficiency and firms’ investments. They aim at promoting research and theory development, increasing knowledge creation, and solving problems. The benefits include new researches outputs, practical business solutions to commercialize.

User: User – driven is focused on solving users’ everyday-life problems. These LL are driven by users, who don’t manage the network or its operations.


Types of Open Living LabsStrategic R&D activity with pre-set objectives

Network forms around an utilizer, who organizes actions for rapid knowledge results

Utilizer guides information collection from the users and promotes knowledge creation that supports the achievement of pre-set goals

Utilizer guides information collection from the users and promotes knowledge creation that supports the achievement of pre-set goals

Strategic R&D activity with pre-set objectives

Strategy development through action

Operations development through increased knowledge

Problem solving by collaborative accomplishments

Purpose

Organization

Action

Outcomes

Lifespan

1 - Utilizer-driven 2 - Enabler-driven 3 - Provider-driven 4 - User-driven

Network forms around a region (regional development) or a funded project (public funding)

Network forms around a provider organization

Network initiated by users lacks formal coordination mechanism

Information is collected and used together and knowledge is co-created in the network

Information is collected for immediate or postponed use; new knowledge is based on the information that providers gets from the others

Information is not collected locally and builds upon users’ interests;Knowledge is utilized in the network to help the user community

Guided strategy change into a preferred direction

New knowledge supporting operations development

Solutions to users’ everyday-life problems

Short/Medium/Long Short/Medium/Long Long


Links with the other activities• Almost all the activities are linked to this

methodology


Entry pointsThe complexity of the situation requires to define clear entry points which concern

• Topics & related specifications

• Constitutive elements of the OLL

• Processes & working methodologies


Topics & related specifications

Logistics & Transport

Spatial development

environment & architecture

Business and investment

development

airLED territorial context and related partners interests

Specific, thematic interactions among partners & Stakeholders


MatrixPartners Transport and Logistics spatial development business and investment

development

LP - bp18o Thematic positioning related to airLEDo expected resultso Input on experiences Vs other partner case

o Thematic positioning related to airLEDo expected resultso Input on experiences Vs other partner case


PP2 - RDA BSC




PP4 - Mazovia




PP7 - Vecsés




PP8 - Cerklje




PP9 - RERo Thematic positioning related to airLEDo expected resultso Input on experiences Vs other partner case




Constitutive elements of the OLL

Public Authorithies

Firms

Universities

Users Citizens


airLED Constitutive elements of the OLL

RDCB ASG

Partnership

RDCB Members

RDCB Managers

KTI

Thematic experts

IUD

Political Board

Local / Regional levelPolicy focus

UE levelTechnical expertise focus


airLED Constitutive elements of the OLL

RDCB ASG

Partnership

FirmsPublic

Authorithies

Universities/ Research

Users Citizens

Need to answer this complexity with work processes methodologies and clear setup and enrichments of technical expertise


Thematic interactionsTools• 4.2.7,11,13,14,18,4.3.1,8,9

3.2.10-13 Regional integrated plans

3.3.12-15 Roadmaps for endorsement

3.2.9 Transnational strategy

RDCB Meetings

Peer Review

Interactions


RDCB• O3.3.8-11• 7 meetings in each region• It is up to the single partner to define the channels for

stakeholders involvement as well as the relevant strategies• ASG support is needed• Thematic Experts (TE) are needed• Signature list• Report of the meeting• Possibly photos


RDCB Meetings3rd RDCB• SQ analysis finalized/presented• Definition of expected results from the Regional development plan (what is the concrete outputs referred to the matrix of topics)• Definition of stakeholders to be involved

4th RDCB - Initial milestones of elaboration• Backcasting approach suggested• Definition of actors to be involved• Input from SQ analysis output and Peer Review workshops• Actions and Technical studies needed for the development plan

6th RDCB - Final milestones of elaboration• Backcasting approach suggested• Conclusion of the Regional development plan (with ASG written feedback also on reports of RDCB)• Eventual tuinings• Input from pilots and from master class• Definition of steps for endorsement

7th RDCB - finalisation of development plan• Internal approval

5th RDCB - Midterm milestones of elaboration• Backcasting approach suggested• Discussion on the development plan draft (with ASG written feedback also on reports of RDCB)• Input from GP analysis based on topic matrix draft technical studies & interim pilot tools results

ASG

ASG

TE

TE

TE


Focus on backcastingProcess of moving from the developed scenarios backwards to the present situation of the participants

Step 1Consider possible constraints to realise the back-casting skeleton. Possible constraints are listed for each of the stakeholders.

Step 2How to overcome these constraints?

Step 3Consider possible, positive and negative by-effects of their proposals. By-effects are effects that are not intended but could occur as part of the process (spillover / side effects).

BRAIN STORMING ON

CONSTRAINTS

PROBLEM SOLVING

BY-EFFECTS

Please consider the Backcasting process as proposal


Focus on backcastingProcess of moving from the developed scenarios backwards to the present situation of the participants

Step 1Consider possible constraints to realise the back-casting skeleton. Possible constraints are listed for each of the stakeholders.

Step 2How to overcome these constraints?

Step 3Consider possible, positive and negative by-effects of their proposals. By-effects are effects that are not intended but could occur as part of the process (spillover / side effects).

BRAIN STORMING ON

CONSTRAINTS

PROBLEM SOLVING

BY-EFFECTS

Please consider the Backcasting process as proposal

P rob lem s

Vision sS ocia l im ag in a tion

Valu esIdeas

R ea lisa tion

O vercom in g barriers

C h an ge agen ts


Peer review workshop• Methodological approach of the meeting

– Constitutive phase – Problems focusing phase – Co-building phase of regional integrated polycentric development plan

key priorities• Input

– SQ analysis– Support of the experts and ASG

• Participants– Partners– RDCB Members– ASG

Interactive sessions


MasterclassConstitutive elements• INPUT from external experts on:

– Examples of airled tools application (real cases)• Tool 1: Policy making modelling tool• Tool 2: Airport city with Imageneering• Tool 3: One stop shop

– High level expert in airport city– Cases of airport cities– Financing airport cities

• BEI, Connecting Europe facility (CEF)

• INPUT from ASG (KTI+IRM)– GP Analysis (O4.1.20)

• Participation of Thematic Expert from partners – Needed for the transnational workshops

Gain

ing

inpu

ts


Transnational thematic workshops• Outputs: 3.2.8-3.2.1.14

– 2 days including 3rd supporting tool workshops; – 3 experts/PP (internal and 2 external) along the thematic pillar discuss the outcome

of Master Class and further steps to be taken. – Focus also on finalisation of supporting tools

• Constitutive elements– Thematic Expert from partners who participated at the masterclass– ASG– Partners working on the three tools– Airport Regions Conference (ARC)

• Three steps approach– Workshop 1: O3.1.1 done– Workshop 2: Main contents of the transnational strategy– Workshop 3: Draft final of the transnational strategy


Transnational thematic workshops/2Possible structure

airLED pillars within the airport city concept

Block 1Plenary session

Block 2Parallel sessions per pillar

Block 3Plenary session

Logistics & Transport

Spatial development

environment & architecture

Business and investment

development



Giuseppe [email protected]

Anna [email protected]

Alberto [email protected]

Documents

Methodology for the Open Living Lab process