Many Higher Education Institutions utilize living labs to address complex societal challenges and foster innovative and sustainable solutions on campus. Despite the perceived benefits of campus environments for transdisciplinary real-world innovation, living labs often encounter challenges. As such, there is a growing need for more knowledge on facilitating these on-campus initiatives in different development phases. Here, enabling factors for on-campus living labs are investigated and their salience across the living labs’ development process established. First, a systematic literature review was conducted, identifying sixteen enabling factors. The most pertinent ones were stakeholders and networks, coordination on the organizational level, a conducive work culture, co-creation and collaboration, and suitable methods and practices for living labs. Second, all factors’ relevance across living labs’ development phases were assessed through the input of an expert panel. To that end, a mapping exercise was developed, which can in itself serve as a discussion tool for living lab practitioners. The results suggested that the initiation phase relies on leadership, coordination, stakeholder engagement, a conducive work culture, and funding. In contrast, operational phases were enabled by shared understanding, internal management, stakeholder collaboration, methodological appropriateness, and evaluation. Lastly, the dissemination phase hinged on transfer, scaling, evaluation, learning, and bridging stakeholders and contexts. These insights contribute to a better understanding of enabling factors for campus living labs during different phases of development, offering tailored guidance for stakeholders while stressing adaptability to local contexts. Subsequently, campus living labs may be better equipped to effectively generate sustainable solutions for the complex societal questions of this time.

@en

Living labs are becoming increasingly popular as suitable arrangements for cocreation and innovation by bringing multiple stakeholders together to work on (solving) complex societal challenges. University campuses are ideal places for living labs, and many universities use such arrangements for various experiments in relation to sustainable future initiatives. Despite the popularity of the living lab concept, much remains unclear about their ways of operation and their potential to innovate. This study aims to show some of the current challenges of on-campus living labs involved with experiments concerning the energy transition. A total of six different living labs were examined based on semistructured interviews with different stakeholders ranging from researchers to operational staff members. Our results show several internal and external challenges, such as the living lab set-up and multiple operational challenges concerning administration, coordination and governance. More external challenges include the overall embeddedness of living labs within the more traditional organizational structure of the university and the tensions between academic and operational processes. Despite these challenges, we conclude that a university campus is still a fruitful place for living labs to cocreate and innovate. By creating awareness and understanding of the challenges living labs face, future initiatives may be facilitated better so that campus living labs are able to unlock their potential to innovate and contribute to societal challenges sooner rather than later.

@en

This dissertation investigates how Higher Education Institutions can contribute to a climate-neutral future by leveraging campus-based living labs—real-world spaces where stakeholders co-create innovative sustainable solutions. By investigating the case of the Delft University of Technology, this research quantifies the university’s carbon footprint and identifies major emission hotspots, providing a baseline for targeted climate action.
Campus living labs are a promising approach to address complex sustainability challenges, such as creating a climate-neutral campus. However, the intricacies of facilitating and running these living labs remain underexamined. This dissertation addresses this gap by examining the challenges of campus living labs and highlighting key enablers—such as effective stakeholder collaboration, organizational integration, and a supportive work culture. Central to this research is the "Campus as a Living Lab" framework, a comprehensive approach where the entire university serves as a breeding ground for sustainable experimentation and innovation. Moving beyond isolated initiatives, the Campus as a Living Lab seeks to foster synergies across activities, thereby amplifying their potential impacts towards climate neutrality on campus and beyond.
Through practical insights and actionable recommendations, this dissertation provides a base for Higher Education Institutions and living lab practitioners to co-create sustainable solutions for today’s complex challenges. The time for action is now. @en

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive analysis of the carbon footprint of the Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), including direct and indirect emissions from utilities, logistics and purchases, as well as a discussion about the commonly used method. Emissions are presented in three scopes (scope 1 reports direct process emissions, scope 2 reports emissions from purchased energy and scope 3 reports indirect emissions from the value chain) to identify carbon emission hotspots within the university’s operations. Design/methodology/approach: The carbon footprint was calculated using physical and monetary activity data, applying a process and economic input-output analysis. Findings: TU Delft’s total carbon footprint in 2018 is calculated at 106 ktCO2eq. About 80% are indirect (scope 3) emissions, which is in line with other studies. Emissions from Real estate and construction, Natural gas, Equipment, ICT and Facility services accounted for about 64% of the total footprint, whereas Electricity, Water and waste-related carbon emissions were negligible. These findings highlight the need to reduce universities’ supply chain emissions. Originality/value: A better understanding of carbon footprint hotspots can facilitate strategies to reduce emissions and finally achieve carbon neutrality. In contrast to other work, it is argued that using economic input-output models to calculate universities’ carbon footprints is a questionable practice, as they can provide only an initial estimation. Therefore, the development of better-suited methods is called for.@en