Encyclopedia of Sustainability in Higher Education

2019 Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho

Living Labs for Sustainability

  • Silvia Sayuri MandaiEmail author
  • Fernanda da Rocha Brando
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11352-0_321

Synonyms

Introduction

Studies have pointed out that human activities have reached a level which can damage the systems of Earth or exceeded crucial ecological limits/planetary boundaries (Rockström et al. 2009; Steffen et al. 2015). These patterns of consumption and production are associated with populations’ lifestyles, such as global extraction in a much faster rate than what our global ecosystem can regenerate, use of natural resources, and the release of waste and emissions from their use (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005; Rockström et al. 2009; UNEP 2010; Steinberger et al. 2013; Steffen et al. 2015).

Then, it is necessary a holistic approach which englobes and optimizes the entire production-consumption-system (Liedtke et al. 2012). This issue depends on individual decision-making and behavioral actions combined with processes of organizational learning, including the social context (Sanne 2002; Reisch and Ropke 2005; Biel and...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alshuwaikhat HM, Abubakar I (2008) An integrated approach to achieving campus sustainability: assessment of the current campus environmental management practices. J Clean Prod 16(16):1777–1785.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ballon P, Pierson J, Delaere S (2005) Test and Experimentation Platforms for Broadband Innovation: Examining European Practice. In: Proceedings of 16th European regional conference, Porto, 4–6 September.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1331557
  3. Bergvall-Kåreborn B, Eriksson CI, Ståhlbröst A, Lund J (2009) A milieu for innovation: defining living labs. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ISPIM innovation symposium, New York, 6–9 DecemberGoogle Scholar
  4. Biel A, Thøgersen J (2007) Activation of social norms in social dilemmas: a review of the evidence and reflections on the implications for environmental behavior. J Ecol Psychol 28(1):93–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2006.03.003
  5. Bulkeley H, Broto VC (2012) Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change. Trans Inst Br Geogr 38(3):361–375.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00535.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cortese AD (2003) The critical role of higher education in creating a sustainable future. Plan High Educ J 31:15–22Google Scholar
  7. Eriksson M, Niitamo V, Oyj S, Kulkki S (2005) State-of-the-art in utilizing living labs approach to user-centric ICT innovation – a European approach. Technology 1(13):1–13Google Scholar
  8. Evans J, Karvonen A (2011) Living laboratories for sustainability: exploring the politics and epistemology of urban transition. In: Bulkeley H, Broto VC, Hodson M, Marvin S (eds) Cities and low carbon transitions. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Evans J, Jones R, Karvonen A, Millard L, Wendler J (2015) Living labs and co-production: university campuses as platforms for sustainability science. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 16:1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.06.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fadeeva Z, Mochizuki Y (2010) Higher education for today and tomorrow: university appraisal for diversity, innovation and change towards sustainable development. Sustain Sci J 5(2):249–256.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-010-0106-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feurstein K, Hesmer A, Hribernik KA, Thoben KD, Schumacher J (2008) Living labs: a new development strategy. In: Schumacher J (ed) European Living Labs: a new approach for human centric regional innovation. wvb Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Berlin. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270821724_Living_Labs_-_A_New_Development_Strategy
  12. Gieryn TF (2006) City as truth-spot: laboratories and field-sites in urban studies. Social Studies of Science 36(1):5–38.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705054526
  13. Green Campus (2013) GREEN CAMPUS 2020 strategy for resource efficiency and sustainability at the University of Copenhagen. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen. Available at http://greencampus.ku.dk/strategy2020/english_version_pixi_GC2020_webversion.pdfGoogle Scholar
  14. Green Campus (2014) A BIG STEP towards a greener campus. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen. Available at http://greencampus.ku.dk/green_results_and_indicators_/Gr_nt_regnskab_webversion_-_engelsk_udgave.pdfGoogle Scholar
  15. Henke C, Gieryn T (2008) Sites of scientific practice: the enduring importance of place. In: Hackett E, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M, Wajcman J (eds) The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd edn. MIT Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Hodson M, Marvin S (2007) Understanding the role of the national exemplar in constructing strategic glurbanisation. Int J Urban Reg Res 31:303–325.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00733.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. IARU (2014) Green Guide for Universities. International Alliance of Research Universities and Sustainia. Available at: https://sustainability.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/iaru_final_web.pdf
  18. Knorr-Cetina K (1995) Laboratory studies: the cultural approach to the study of science. In: Jasanoff S (ed) Handbook of science and technology studies, revised edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks.  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412990127.n7
  19. Konig A, Evans J (2013) Experimenting for sustainable development? Living laboratories, social learning, and the role of the university. In: Konig A (ed) Regenerative sustainable development of universities and cities: the role of living laboratories. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  20. Leal Filho W (2011) About the role of universities and their contribution to sustainable development. High Educ Pol 24:427–438.  https://doi.org/10.1057/hep.2011.16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liedtke C, Welfens MJ, Rohn H, Nordmann J (2012) LIVING LAB: user-driven innovation for sustainability. Int J Sustain High Educ 13(2):106–118.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14676371211211809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lozano R, Lozano FJ, Mulder K, Huisingh D, Waas T (2013) Advancing higher education for sustainable development: international insights and critical reflections. J Clean Prod 48:3–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.03.034
  23. Mandai SS, Brando FR (2018) Experiences in sustainability of two public universities in different contexts: the University of Copenhagen and the University of São Paulo. In: Leal Filho W, Frankenberger F, Iglecias P, Mülfarth R (eds) World sustainability series, vol 1, 1st edn. Springer International Publishing, Basel, pp 653–668.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76885-4_44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McCormick K, Kiss B (2015) Learning through renovations for urban sustainability: the case of the Malmo Innovation Platform. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 16:44–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.06.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Meira AM, Bonzanini TK, Rosa AV, Ometto AR, Gois CC, Cunha DGF (2014) Socio-environmental formation in capillarity to employees of Universidade de São Paulo. In: The 6th international conference on environmental education and sustainability “the best of both worlds”. Proceedings of the 6th international conference on environmental education and sustainability, vol 1. Sesc Publisher, São Paulo, pp 258–269Google Scholar
  26. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  27. Müller-Christ G, Sterling S, van Dam-Mieras R, Adomßent M, Fischer D, Rieckmann M (2014) The role of campus, curriculum, and community in higher education for sustainable development – a conference report. J Clean Prod 62:134–137.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.02.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nystrom AG, Leminen S, Westerlund M, Kortelainen M (2014) Actor roles and role patterns influencing innovation in living labs. Ind Mark Manag 43(3):483–495.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.12.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pincetl S (2010) From the sanitary city to the sustainable city: challenges to institutionalizing biogenic (nature’s services) infrastructure. Local Environ 15:43–58.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830903406065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reisch L, Ropke I (2005) The ecological economics of consumption. Eartscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson A, Chapin FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ, Nykvist B, De Wit CA, Hughes T, Van Der Leeuw S, Rodhe H, Sörlin S, Snyder PK, Costanza R, Svedin U, Falkenmark M, Karlberg L, Corell RW, Fabry VJ, Hansen J, Walker B, Liverman D, Richardson K, Crutzen P, Foley JA (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475.  https://doi.org/10.1038/461472aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sanne C (2002) Willing consumers – or locked in? Policies for a sustainable consumption. Ecol Econ 42:273–287.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00086-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schliwa G (2013) Exploring living labs through transition management – challenges and opportunities for sustainable urban transitions. IIIEE master thesis. http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/lup/publication/4091934
  34. Science (2016) Vild campus. Available at http://www.science.ku.dk/vildcampus
  35. Shove E (2003) Comfort, cleanliness and convenience – the social organization of normality. Berg, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  36. Shove E (2005) Changing human behavior and lifestyle. In: Reisch L, Ropke I (eds) The ecological economics of consumption. Eartscan, London, pp 45–58Google Scholar
  37. Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J, Cornell SE, Fetzer I, Bennett EM, Biggs R, Carpenter SR, de Vries W, de Wit CA, Folke C, Gerten D, Heinke J, Mace GM, Persson LM, Ramanathan V, Reyers B, Sörlin S et al (2015) Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Steinberger JK, Krausmann F, Getzner M, Schandl H, West J (2013) Development and dematerialization: an international study. PLoS One 8(10):e70385.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sudan DC, de Meira AM, Sorrentino M, da Rocha Brando Fernandez F, Silva RLF, Martirani LA et al (2015) Environmental education for staff at the University of São Paulo, Brazil: capillarity and critical environmental education put into action. In: Leal Filho W, Azeiteiro UM, Caeiro S, Alves F (Org) World sustainability series, 1st edn, vol 2. Springer International Publishing, Basel, pp 543–558Google Scholar
  40. UNEP (2010) Assessing the environmental impacts of consumption and production: priority products and materials. A report of the working group on the environmental impacts of products and materials to the International Panel for Sustainable Resource ManagementGoogle Scholar
  41. Voytenko Y, McCormick K, Evans J, Schliwa G (2016) Urban living labs for sustainability and low carbon cities in Europe: towards a research agenda. J Clean Prod 123:45–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Warde A (2005) Consumption and theories of practice. J Consum Cult 5(2):131–153.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540505053090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wenger E (2007) Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvia Sayuri Mandai
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fernanda da Rocha Brando
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Arts, Sciences and HumanitiesUniversity of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Faculty of Philosophy, Sciences and Letters of Ribeirão PretoUniversity of São PauloRibeirão PretoBrazil

Section editors and affiliations

  • Patrizia Lombardi
    • 1
  1. 1.Politecnico di TorinoTurinItaly