The promise of living labs to the Quadruple Helix stakeholders: exploring the sources of (dis)satisfaction

Abstract

Despite the normative view that Quadruple Helix collaborations (with government, academia, industry and civil society) such as living labs are prescribed to enhance regional innovation performance, there is scarce knowledge of the sustainability of such collaborations from the perspective of the stakeholders who are supposed to engage in such initiatives. To address this gap, the purpose of this paper is to empirically explore the implementation of the Quadruple Helix for innovation from a stakeholder perspective, by understanding the expectations as well as the perceived benefits and challenges of the collaboration. Through a qualitative research design, this paper presents an in-depth case study of a living lab in the region of Catalonia. Our results challenge the normative view of Quadruple Helix approaches and of living labs; we also offer suggestions to manage future collaborations and to inform further evidence-based policy. On the whole, partnership leadership and coordination are critical to bridge the expectationimplementation gap towards stakeholder satisfaction and collaboration sustainability.

Knowledge Innovation Ecosystem for the Promotion of User-Centre Health Innovations: Living Lab Methodology and Lessons Learned Through the Proposal of Standard Good Practices

“…By allowing the providers and their solutions to contact and engage with both end-users and experts it is possible to synchronize and nurture the process of knowledge generation and innovation progress from a quadruple helix model perspective [1, 90]. As stated by Nguyen and Marques [91] by involving a broader range of collaborators in the innovation creation and leveraging process, the quadruple helix has the potential to offer a multitude of outcomes, which are not limited to solution-oriented innovation. Hence, not only without stakeholders’ participation, the LL experience would fail but a degree of reflection and planning should be taken for their selection and gathering since the number, background and the stakeholders’ initial interest will be one of the governing factors that impact the knowledge share, innovation leveraging and collaboration obtained from the KIE program.…”

What Role for Citizens? Evolving Engagement in Quadruple Helix Smart District Initiatives

“…In this sense, the quadruple helix was used as a rhetorical device that paid lip service to the presence of broad stakeholder groups and failed to detail how multiple, changing actor positions could be accommodated. There was no indication of any challenge to the appropriateness or legitimacy of the Quadruple Helix or any alternative ways to represent actors, their roles, or their responsibilities (Nguyen & Marques, 2021; Citizen engagement as a process Involve citizens as early as possible in the design and delivery of engagement activities.…”

“…Since then, the Smart Dublin programme has expanded to include: Smart DCU-a university campus; Smart D8a health and well-being district; Smart Sandyford-a business district; Smart Dún Laoghaire-a coastal "climate" district; and Smart Balbriggan-a coastal town referred to as Ireland's first smart "community" district. All of the districts within the Smart Dublin programme state that they apply the quadruple helix innovation systems conceptual framework as a means for four stakeholder groups-government, academia, industry and citizens-to co-produce smart city projects (Nguyen & Marques, 2021).…”

How Do We Know Co-Created Solutions Work Effectively within the Real World of People Living with Dementia? Learning Methodological Lessons from a Co-Creation-to-Evaluation Case Study

“…To guide the use of these methodologies, the quadruple helix partnership approach comes into its own, where all relevant parties, including people with dementia, guide the LL team through the exploration of the options available. Combining empiric and naturalistic methodologies generates multiple advantages, with one complementing the other [ 47 ]. The case study demonstrates how a lack of real-world sensitivity in measuring QOL in dementia can be counterbalanced by the abundance of rich narrative data [ 39 , 48 ].…”