A methodological approach for holistic energy planning using the living lab concept: the case of the prefecture of Karditsa

Abstract

The development of urban and rural landscapes has entered a pioneering era with novel combinations of energy production and consumption and related changes in the urban and rural fabric including associated socioeconomic issues. Accompanying this change is a realization that newly developing energy initiatives are more viable for development and upscaling and are less vulnerable to failure and resistance from society if they are well integrated into their local and regional contexts. However, institutional questions remain regarding the required mechanisms and levels of integration, while simultaneously sustainable energy planning requires that the stakeholders with diverse and conflicting objectives come to some degree of consensus. Inspired by these findings, a methodological approach for holistic energy planning on a regional/local level was developed within the framework of the INTENSSS-PA project that is funded by HORIZON 2020. The approach provides a holistic energy plan, which goes beyond a blueprint for allocating renewable technologies and is based on the involvement of the wider community. Hence, this approach includes aspects such as the development of spatial concepts, new co-creating strategies, business cases, societal alliances and institutional changes and formats. To implement this approach, the Living Lab (LL) concept is applied. The case of Karditsa, in Greece, will be presented as evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed planning approach.

A Systematic Review on the Application of the Living Lab Concept and Role of Stakeholders in the Energy Sector

“…The first component is experimentation, which is built on everyday practices in a real-time environment [46,51] or a geographically bound space [37]. The second component focuses on innovation processes and the development of new products, services, societal infrastructures [27,45,47], knowledge, and research [23,24,39]. The third component is on the importance of collaboration-the involvement of both users, in other words those living in the lab, and multiple stakeholders from different sectors in cocreation [35,37].…”

“…Source "A user centric research methodology for sensing, prototyping, validating, and refining complex solutions in multiple and evolving real life contexts". Giannouli et al [47] p. 15…”

“…The concept of sustainability is of growing interest worldwide, and as a result, living labs have become an important part of a sustainable transition. Five studies have mentioned different categories of living labs that stem from the following: the need to advance sustainable development (with the realisation of all three pillars-economy, society, and environment) [30], a response to the ratification of the Paris Agreement in 2015 and reducing CO 2 emissions [32], changing national energy policies and systems [47], and improving energy consumption of the built environment [36,53]. These are therefore labelled either as a 'regional living lab', a 'sustainability living lab', or an 'urban living lab'.…”

“…According to Claude et al [36], an urban living lab is an experimental form of urban governance that creates solutions to confront urbanisation challenges and address climate change and resilience issues. Similarly, when describing a regional living lab, Giannouli et al [47] acknowledges the governance aspect that a living lab enables in integrated sustainable energy planning. For instance, a regional living lab as a strategy and environment provided a balance between bottom-up and top-down approaches, while bringing together multilevel structures and stakeholders in the governance of transitioning energy systems across the Karditsa region in Greece [47].…”

“…Similarly, the literature on living labs realised at regional levels was found not to focus on specific projects but rather to aim at promoting sustainable regional planning [47], as well as policymaking in innovation and research to improve people's quality of life and reduce territorial and economic disparities [29,45]. Where living labs are implemented as networks across different cities or countries, these projects are noted to have the same aims, operations, dwelling types, and socio-economic characteristics, such as high unemployment and low education levels [26,30,51].…”