Labs in the Real World: Advancing Transdisciplinary Research and Sustainability Transformation

Research approaches establishing laboratories in real-world contexts (LRWs) have gained popularity. These approaches use different terms, build on different research traditions and are applied in multiple research contexts. Yet, the collaboration of scientific and societal actors, their embeddedness in real-world contexts and use of experimentation, seem to be common. The salience of approaches is also evident in the sharply increasing number of publications (figure 1)1. In the last ten years, the use of LRWs, with a topical rela tion to sustainability issues, has increased disproportionally. In 2017, approximately 36 percent of overall LRW publications were sustainability-related, which include, for instance: urban living labs, socio-technical experiments and transition arenas. Arguably, these LRWs aim to produce evi dence on solutions to societal chal leng es (Caniglia et al. 2017) and support change towards sustain abili ty (Voytenko et al. 2016). As part of this broader “experimental turn” in sustainability science (Overdevest et al. 2010), real-world laboratories (RwLs; German: Reallabore) have lately witnessed an increasing popular ity (figure 1), particularly evi dent in the German speaking discourse. As RwLs often originate from research policy initiatives (e.g., funding lines in Baden-Württemberg), they are met with high expecta tions and critical voices, demanding a thorough discourse. The multitude of terms bears the risk of obscuring key topics addressed and potential contributions made by the different LRW approaches. This might hinder learning processes within the respective scientific communities and beyond. To provide an over view on the discourse, we used a semantic mapping2 tool to reveal frequently used terms and interrelations between them. Subsequently, we mapped publications dealing with LRWs in two consecutive steps: we present semantic clusters for LRWs in gener al (A), before presenting those with relation to sustainability (B). This also allows us to embed debates on RwLs into a broader context and to show the development of the discourse. The semantic map of all LRW settings (figure 2, p.10) shows a dominant cluster around the terms of living labs and (open) Labs in the Real World: Advancing Transdisciplinary Research and Sustainability Transformation. Mapping the Field and Emerging Lines of Inquiry | GAIA 27/S1(2018): 8 –11 |

Comparing both maps, the sustainabiltiy-related discourse on LRWs appears nested within broader LRW debates.Yet, differentiations and focuses within the former become visible.The abundant and unspecific use of living labs as a concept in (A) witnesses a more differentiated use in (B), either being related to a clear research area (Drb) or oriented towards normative concepts (Ob).In contrast, formerly separated discourses around transition management, socio-technical transitions and smart cities (Ra), and on transdisciplinarity, RwLs and research policy (Ba), merge into one cluster (Bb).This indicates a certain convergence of two discourses: one originating in science and technology studies, innovation and complexity studies; and the other in philosophy of science, collaborative and sustainability research.Therein, the terms of sustainability transitions, experiments and learning operate as interlinking elements of joint interest.Finally, the clusters centering around computing (Ga) and evalutation (Ya) do not re-occur in (B).Both either suggest a limited relevance with regards to sustainability related labs, or an underexplored topic.
Differentiating the temporal occurence of terms in (B) allow "hot topics" to be identified with highest occurence in latest years (see supplement SMR-Temp) 1 .This includes RwLs, transdisciplinarity, and research policy, urban living labs in relation to sustainability and energy transitions, experimentation related to learning and transition management.Interestingly, formerly identified interlinking elements re-appear as hot topics underpinning their importance for the discourse development.Semantic analysis of topics broadly discussed in RwL publications (supplement SMR-RwL) 1 reinforced named hot topics, adding terms around transformative research.In sum, the RwL discourse mirrors salient key debates in the broader sustainability LRW discourse.Thus, RwLs appear as a suitable, dynamic example contributing to the development of the broader field.

Emerging Lines of Inquiry
Building on the above, we propose two basic directions for strengthening the discourse on RwLs and sustainability related LRWs: 1. deepening the discourse by elaborating on RwLs as an example of LRWs focusing sustainability, including experiences from Baden-Württemberg and beyond; 2. broadening and integrating the dis course, by relating RwL debates to international debates around other LRW approaches.
In this special issue, we bring together articles that allow us to both build bridges in the diversified field of sustainability-related LWRs, and advance knowledge on key topics in RwL practice.Taking into account the semantic analysis and hot topics identified, we have clustered the contributions into four areas: Transformative potential: Proposed as "ideal-type" of transformative research, RwLs are at the centre of controversial discussions revolving around topics such as the "the third mission of universities" or "the responsibility of research to contribute to societal transformations".Critical questions address the transfor mative innovation (red/Ra).Therein, various subclusters can be identified.These include living labs, smart homes and ambient intelligence, smart grids, and ICT.Other subclusters relate to living labs and learning, education and experiments or to living labs and governance, sustainability, climate change, and transition management.This living lab cluster is complemented by three clusters centering around: 1. computing (green/Ga), future internet, virtual reality, smart cities, and experimental design, 2. evaluation (yellow/Ya), simulation, project management and services, 3. transdisciplinarity (blue/Ba), co-design, RwLs and experimentation.
In the semantic map of LRW related to sustainability (figure 3   As this special issue demonstrates, RwLs are a dynamic example in the expanding field of research in labs oriented towards sustainability.They promise to advance td research and sustainability transformation.Nevertheless, more conceptual and empirical development such as evaluation or the role of computing in RwLs appears needed.Further articles complementing this special issue will appear in GAIA.

Learning:
LRWs contribute to capacity development, new scientific insights and societal learning, building on iterations of experimentation and reflection.Questions tackle labs as educational set tings, tools and processes for knowledge integration, experimental and transformative learning.Singer-Brodowski et al.(pp.23-27)apply a systematic perspective from the discourse on education for sustainable develop -GAIA 27/S1(2018): 12 -17 Semantic clusters of publications all LRW settings (core section of overall map, full map in supplement) 1 .Size of bullets represents frequency of occurrence of terms, size of arrows depict frequency of co-occurrence.Colours indicate different clusters of highly co-occuring terms.

the laboratory settings cluster (blue/Bb), which
Number of annual publications on laboratories in real-world contexts (LRWs)(and with a topical relation to sustainability issues) in peer-reviewed journals and peer-reviewed books.Publications were identified via a title, keywords and abstracts search in the Scopus database.For RwL (broad search), a second full text search was done to trace earlier roots of the respective discourse.
brings together various lab-like approaches related to sustainability and transitions.This includes urban living labs, urban transitions labs, strategic niche management, and transition arenas.The terms of transdisciplinary (td), experiments and RwL appear, accompanied by research policy.>Transdisciplinarity:There is a fundamental debate on the relation of LRW settings to transdisciplinary (td) research approaches, including questions of successful practice to realize co-creation, coproduction and co-design: