Abstract:The urban population in Europe is expected to be 80% in 2020. Urban living labs (ULLs) are emerging as a form of collective urban governance and experimentation to address the sustainability challenges and opportunities created by urbanisation. They have different goals, they are initiated by various actors, and they form different types of partnerships. There is no uniform ULL definition. However, many projects studying and testing living lab methodologies are focusing on urban sustainability and low carbon challenges, as demonstrated by the current projects funded by the Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) Urban Europe. At the same time, there is no clear understanding of what the ultimate role of ULLs is in urban governance, and whether they represent a completely new phenomenon that is replacing other forms of participation, collaboration, experimentation, learning and governing in cities. There is a need to clarify what makes the ULL approach attractive and novel. The aim of this article is to examine how the ULL concept is being operationalised in contemporary urban governance for sustainability and low carbon cities. This is undertaken through the analysis of academic literature complemented with five snapshot case studies of major ongoing ULL projects in Europe. Five key ULL characteristics are identified: geographical embeddedness, experimentation and learning, participation and user involvement, leadership and ownership, and evaluation and refinement. Four topics are found relevant when comparing ULLs: ways to operationalise the ULL approach, the type of ULL partnership and the role of research institutions, the types of challenges addressed by different ULLs, and the role of sustainability, environment and low carbon agenda in ULLs.Keywords: Urban living labs; sustainability transitions; low carbon cities; knowledge co-creation; experiments; learning Highlights: European cities face many sustainability challenges and opportunities.  Urban living labs (ULLs) are emerging as a form of collective urban governance.  There is a need to clarify what makes the ULL approach attractive and novel.  We explore how the ULL concept is operationalised in contemporary urban governance for sustainability and low carbon cities.  We start developing a database of ULLs for sustainability and low carbon transitions in Europe.3

a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f oUrban freight and city logistics are central to the UK economy, but face a number of economic and environmental challenges. This paper contributes to a new body of research that investigates the potential of cargo cycles to make city logistics more sustainable and explores ways to encourage their diffusion. The paper makes three key contributions. First, it develops a typology of cycle logistics based on a literature review and expert interviews in order to clarify definitions and terminology. Second, it identifies perception issues, lack of awareness and regulations as major barriers to wider implementation at city level based on snap-shot case studies. Third, it suggests a sustainable city logistics framework for urban governance, logistic operations and future research, to harness the potential of using cargo cycles for sustainable urban freight transport. The paper argues that local authorities have a key role to play in creating conditions that incentivise large logistic companies such as DHL, Hermes and TNT to integrate cargo cycles into their supply chain and hence drive a long-term modal shift. The findings of the paper are of interest to policy makers, urban logistic operators, research institutions and citizens as potential customers.

Cities are increasingly seeking to learn from experiences elsewhere when planning programmes of sustainable transition management, and the contingencies of policy-learning arrangements in this field are beginning to receive greater attention. This paper applies insights from the field of policy mobilities to the burgeoning field of transition management to critically explore a proposed ‘learning relationship’ between Berlin (Germany) and Manchester (UK) around cycling policy. Drawing on qualitative data, the paper casts doubt over the existing consensus attributing recent growth in bicycle use in Berlin to concerted governmental interventions. A multi-actor analysis suggests that contextual factors caused the growth in cycling and that policy has been largely reactive. The emergence and circulation of the Berlin cycling renaissance as a policy model is then traced through policy documents and interviews with actors in Manchester, UK, to understand why and how it has become a model for action elsewhere. It is concluded that Berlin’s cycling renaissance has been simplified and mobilised to demonstrate the requisite ambition and proficiency to secure competitive funds for sustainable urban transport. The paper develops an original study of the role policy knowledge and learning play in sustainable urban transition management, and argues that attending to the dynamics of policy learning can enhance our understanding of its successes and failures.

Re-shaping infrastructure systems and social practices within urban contexts has been promoted as a critical way to address a range of contemporary economic, environmental and social challenges. Though there are many attempts to re-imagine more sustainable urban contexts the challenge remains how to achieve such change. In this context, urban experiments have emerged as a way to stage purposive infrastructure interventions and learn what works in practice. The paper integrates literatures on urban governance and urban socio-technical experiments to extend analytical understanding of urban experimentation. Through a case study of ‘sustainable transport’ experimentation in Greater Manchester, we argue that place-based priorities that inform action on sustainable urban futures are conditioned by non-place-based, particularly national, interests. Our paper makes two key contributions. First, we illustrate how the (narrow) national conditioning of place-based priorities translates in to experimentation in episodic ways that are highly contextual. We detail how national priorities, stipulations and funding are mediated and translated at the urban scale where they set conditions for the range of interventions that are feasible in a particular context. The interventions that follow are then materially embedded in place through experimentation with processes of governing and constituting capacity. Second, we argue that the learning generated through these processes of experimentation is only weakly communicated back to conditioning institutions. The result is that there is strong conditioning of experimentation but weak experimentation with conditions. The paper illustrates how the potential of experimentation is conditioned and thus it brings to the fore the need to understand experimentation politically.

No abstract