Modelling Cultural Living Labs: A Process-based Review
Ilaria Rosetti & Trilce Navarrete
What the paper says
The proliferation of Living Labs in the past decades has generated a great variety of definitions, practices, and research in different fields. Particularly, applications in the cultural and heritage field have increased in the past decades, which is in line with the emergence of a participatory turn in the sector. However, existing literature mainly focuses on the characteristics of Living Labs rather than their processes, fuelling existing issues related to first-time approachability, replicability, participation, and evaluation. Through a systematic interdisciplinary literature review of general Living Labs definitions and field-specific applications, this research aims to develop a process-based definition that encompasses steps, key elements, and objectives of Living Labs and addresses these challenges. By doing so, it brings four main contributions: first, it advances the theoretical modelling of Living Labs incorporating the perspective of cultural practices. Second, it proposes a practical model of Living Labs to be adopted and adapted across cultural fields – and beyond – to set-up and implement Living Labs. Third, it raises awareness of Living Labs’ potential for the development of sustainable and transformative participatory practices in the cultural heritage field. Last, it identifies the potential contribution of Cultural Living Labs’ experiences to addressing challenges of replicability, participation, and evaluation for the greater interdisciplinary Living Labs field. Future research can test the use of this model in guiding first-time Cultural Living Labs users’ practices and subsequently inform the further refinement of the model.
1 citation
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06 |
| M · momentum | 0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.