Top Papers selected by Evaluation Committee


Dr. Dimitri Schuurman

Top contributions will have a prime-time dedicated session at the conference.

Living Lab in Healthcare: Stakeholders’ needs to build a LL and plan activities to contribute to its technology innovation process

by Laura Marone, Rosella Onofrio, Cristina Masella

Category:  Full Research 


  • Living Labs
  • Healthcare innovation
  • Health technologies
  • Multi-stakeholder network

Abstract. Healthcare technology innovation is a very complex process in which different actors interact each with others, creating a large number of interconnections and synergies to design technology innovations. Despite the increasing number of Living Labs in healthcare, building and maintaining Living Labs for technology innovation in healthcare is challenging Collaboration with stakeholders remains an issue of major concern in healthcare. The purpose of this paper is to identify stakeholders’ needs to build a Living Lab (LL) in healthcare and plan activities to foster the innovation process. The paper is based on an exploratory single case study investigating an Italian LL. Eight stakeholders’ needs have been identified and validated. Specific activities have been identified to improve the innovation process in respect of stakeholders’ needs. The study contributes to the development of domain-specific knowledge and, as such, to fostering the diffusion of studies on and implementation of LLs in healthcare.

Collaborative methods: developing a digital innovation for older people self-managing multimorbidity

by Suzanne Smith, An Jacobs, Myriam Sillevis Smit

Category: Practitioners papers



Abstract. The Covid-19 pandemic has resulted in a greater than ever call for digital health and wellbeing solutions, especially those that might support potentially vulnerable members of our communities. In meeting this demand, there is an opportunity to apply learning from the real-world based work of living labs. This presentation will explore the methods used in a multi-stakeholder, cross-country collaborative living lab project, to design and test a digital innovation for use by older people, in the self-management of multimorbidity with the support of their care network.  Stakeholders involved in a forty-two month long project, across trial sites in two countries, included: older people with at least two chronic health conditions (heart failure, COPD, diabetes, heart disease); family caregivers; paid care support workers; and a wide range of hospital and community healthcare professionals. Collaboration with all stakeholders began in the project design and pre-requirements phase and was ongoing throughout the design, development, testing, implementation and evaluation phases.  Crucially, all engagement focussed on the older end-user of the digital solution, while also recognising the needs and requirements of the care eco-system around each user. Methods used included traditional focus groups and interviews but also cross-stakeholder user panels, design workshops, team sprints, friendly trial testing and both technical and wellbeing trial support. The wide breath of engagement methodologies applied resulted in considerable engagement throughout a lengthy 12-month trial, which is particularly notable given the age and health profile of the older participants. Secondly, multiple and cross-stakeholder approaches yielded an intervention that effectively tested transferability to other end-user cohorts as well as advancing pre-commercialisation readiness. Among the many findings from the project, some of the key lessons learned point to the value of sustained multi-stakeholder engagement through all stages of the innovation process, not just during the design and testing phases. The application of mixed methods facilitated tailoring of activities to the stakeholders, as well as the purpose and intended outcome of the activity. Furthermore, ongoing participation of researchers in parallel friendly trial activities ensured current familiarity with the technology used in the trial, especially where commercial grade devices are in use, and ensured researchers remained grounded in the real-world experience of participants. Ultimately, these methods, incorporated into a real-world contextual approach to digital innovation design and testing, form four cornerstones necessary for successful trial and implementation experiences for all stakeholders: competence, relevance, trust and ultimately engagement.

Engaging the Wider Ecosystem: Co-creating Future Food and Restaurant Services

by Kaisa Spilling, Annamaria Rossi

Category: Practitioners presentations


  •  Stakeholder Engagement
  • Agile Piloting
  • Living Lab
  •  Co-Creation
  • Food Ecosystem

Abstract. Food is an essential part of everyday lives in cities and it also plays an important role in slowing down and adapting to climate change. There is a need to transform our urban food systems with a focus on sustainability and resilience. Mission Zero Foodprint project promotes the City of Helsinki’s carbon neutrality goals by engaging the restaurant and food industry to co-create and experiment digital solutions and an operating model to measure and make restaurants’ carbon footprint visible. Successful living lab projects and scale up require wider ecosystem and stakeholder engagement. This case study describes the process of building strong stakeholder engagement within an agile piloting process to support co-creation, experimentation and scale-up. 

Kaisa Spilling

Development Manager, Forum Virium Helsinki

Annamaria Rossi

Project Planner, Forum Virium Helsinki

Living CoLab: A conceptual framework to set up and facilitate transdisciplinary collaborations to tackle societal challenges in a living lab setting

by Kalinauskaite Indre, Brankaert Rens, Lu Yuan

Category:  Full Research paper


  • transdisciplinary collaboration
  • collaboration process
  • co-creation
  • multi-
  • living lab
  • conceptual framework

Abstract.The complexity of today’s societal challenges calls for collaborative effort and novel approaches. Living lab is an extremely attractive open innovation landscape for collaborative research and development activities targeting societal challenges. Not surprisingly, living lab literature is saturated with evidence of how (transdisciplinary) collaboration between different scientific disciplines and sectors, and involving the end user, is vital for the living lab success. However, although there is plenty of support for collaboration, in other words – why we must collaborate, today we still lack clear guidelines to direct transdisciplinary stakeholder networks of academics and practitioners through collaboration process in the living lab ecosystem. In other words, we lack answers to the question how to collaborate. In present paper we propose a conceptual framework to guide stakeholders involved in transdisciplinary collaboration through collaboration initiation phase. We base our framework on collaboration challenges described in the literature, specifically the need for stakeholder alignment, as well as challenges experienced in practice, which we report through exploratory case studies. In proposed conceptual framework we advocate for employing of co-creation methods on a meso and macro layers of a living lab ecosystem in order to collaboratively define living lab scope and strategy and facilitate stakeholder alignment. Additionally, we integrate an iterative approach and a feedback loop in order to account for the dynamic nature of collaboration process and to enable reflection and evaluation.

Bristol Living Lab: diversity and inclusion

by Lorraine Hudson

Category: Practitioners Presentation


  • Diversity
  • Inclusion
  • Bristol Living Lab
  • ParCos

Abstract. It is important that we address the lack of diversity within ENoLL and ensure that Living Labs develop more inclusive practices. Bristol Living Lab (KWMC) has been working with communities for over 20 years. It is essential for organisations like ours, who have influence, to support people who experience discrimination (black and visible minority ethnic communities, those who experience social-economic disadvantage etc), whose voices aren’t often heard and who face barriers to living safe and fulfilled lives. So that they can achieve their ambitions and together we create a fairer society that values and respects difference. Our work is centred on working collaboratively with people from different backgrounds to develop new and creative models for achieving positive social change. As a partner in the EU ParCos project we are creating principles for diversity and inclusion to guide three citizen science pilots. We will share practical examples and lesson learnt of how we are working to address diversity and inclusion through Bristol Living Lab.

Lorraine Hudson

The Bristol Living Lab Manager

Fast Track Living labs: the problem solution sprint

by Dimitri Schuurman

Category: Practitioners Presentation




Dimitri Schuurman

Team Lead Business & Domain Experts imec's Digital Transformation Department

MIND THE GAP: Understanding and communicating the business value of co-creation

by Julia Nevmerzhitskaya, Suvi Seikkula and Aletta Purola

Category: Full Research


  • co-creation
  • business benefits
  • communication
  • collaboration

Abstract.  Co-creation can be broadly defined as cooperation between different actors or stakeholders who share the same overall objective or goal, which is usually related to providing better customer value. While the overall focus of co-creation in the business context is to create new products, services or processes, it is not always clear, what the business benefits of co-creation are and how these benefits can be efficiently communicated to companies. In this article the authors present the benefits of co-creation as they are described in literature, and as perceived by the business owners involved in co-creation processes within the EU-funded Horizon 2020 project CIRC4Life. The analysis of the literature showed that the key business benefits of co-creation are increased creativity, shared knowledge, and better commitment via customer engagement. At the same time, interviews with business owners revealed that while collaboration is perceived as the key element of co-creation, real business benefits are not well known by the companies. The results indicate that unless co-creation directly improves a company’s business and offers simple solutions, it is perceived as a laborious process which requires extra resources. Based on the results, the authors suggest that there is need for relatable and relevant communication of co-creation from a business perspective, and co-creation benefits need to be addressed not only on the general but also on a practical, and a personal level.