[CrossRef] Bergvall-KÃ¥reborn, Birgitta, and Anna StÃ¥hlbröst. 2009. Living Lab: An open and citizen-centric approach for innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development 1: 356â70. [CrossRef] Bloom, Louise, and Romily Faulkner. 2016. Innovation spaces: Lessons from the United Nations. Third World Quarterly 37: 1371â87.
[CrossRef] Bovaird, Tony, and Elke Loeffler. 2012. From engagement to co-production: The contribution of users and communities to outcomes and public value. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 23: 1119â38. [CrossRef] Bryson, John M., Barbara C. Crosby, and Laura Bloomberg. 2014. Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management. Public Administration Review 74: 445â56. [CrossRef] Bryson, John, Alessandro Sancino, John Benington, and Eva Sørensen. 2017. Towards a multi-actor theory of public value co-creation.
- [CrossRef] DellâEra, Claudio, and Paolo Landoni. 2014. Living Lab: A Methodology between User-Centred Design and Participatory Design.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- [CrossRef] Tiesinga, Hendrickt, and Remko Berkhout. 2014. Labcraft: How Social Labs Cultivate Change through Innovation and Collaboration. London: Labcraft Publishing.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Alford, John, and Janine OâFlynn. 2009. Making sense of public value: Concepts, critiques and emergent meanings. International Journal of Public Administration 32: 171â91. [CrossRef] Almirall, Esteve, and Jonathan Wareham. 2011. Living Labs: Arbiters of mid- and ground-level innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 23: 87â102. [CrossRef] Ansell, Chris, and Alison Gash. 2012. Stewards, mediators, and catalysts: Toward a model of collaborative leadership1. The Innovation Journal 17: 2.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Ballon, Pieter, and Dimitri Schuurman. 2015. Living labs: Concepts, tools and cases. info 17. [CrossRef] Bannister, Frank, and Regina Connolly. 2014. ICT, public svalues and transformative government: A framework and programme for research. Government Information Quarterly 31: 119â28. [CrossRef] Benington, John. 2009. Creating the public in order to create public value? International Journal of Public Administration 32: 232â49.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Chronéer, Diana, Anna StÃ¥hlbröst, and Abdolrasoul Habibipour. 2019. Urban Living Labs: Towards an Integrated Understanding of their Key Components. Technology Innovation Management Review 9: 50â62. [CrossRef] Cordella, Antonio, and Carla M. Bonina. 2012. A public value perspective for ICT enabled public sector reforms: A theoretical reflection.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Creativity & Innovation Management 23: 137â54. [CrossRef] Edwards-Schachter, Mónica E., Cristian E. Matti, and Enrique Alcántara. 2012. Fostering Quality of Life through Social Innovation: A Living Lab Methodology Study Case. Review of Policy Research 29: 672â92. [CrossRef] Eriksson, Mats, Veli-Pekka Niitamo, and Seija Kulkki. 2005. State-of-the-Art in Utilizing Living Labs Approach to User-Centric ICT InnovationâA European Approach. Lulea: Center for Distance-Spanning Technology. Lulea: Lulea University of Technology Sweden.
- Evans, James, Ross Jones, Andrew Karvonen, Lucy Millard, and Jana Wendler. 2015. Living labs and co-production: University campuses as platforms for sustainability science. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 16: 1â6. [CrossRef] Fleischer, Julia, and Nora Carstens. 2021. Policy labs as arenas for boundary spanning: Inside the digital transformation in Germany.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2006. Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry 12: 219â45. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2021, 11, 74 21 of 22 Følstad, Asbjørn. 2008. Living labs for innovation and development of information and communication technology: A literature review. The Electronic Journal for Virtual Organizations and Networks 10: 99â131.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Fuglsang, Lars, Anne Vorre Hansen, Ines Mergel, and Maria Taivalsaari Røhnebæk. 2021. Living Labs for Public Sector Innovation: An Integrative Literature Review. Administrative Sciences 11: 58. [CrossRef] Fukumoto, Eriko, and Barry Bozeman. 2019. Public Values Theory: What Is Missing? The American Review of Public Administration 49: 635â48. [CrossRef] Gago, David, and Luis Rubalcaba. 2020. The role of soft skills to leverage co-creation in living labs: Insights from Spain. The Innovation Journal 25: 1â23.
- Gascó, Mila. 2017. Living labs: Implementing open innovation in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly 34: 90â98.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Government Information Quarterly 29: 512â20. [CrossRef] Curtis, Sarah, Wil Gesler, Glenn Smith, and Sarah Washburn. 2000. Approaches to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: Examples in the geography of health. Social Science & Medicine 50: 1001â14. [CrossRef] Dekker, Rianne, Juan Franco Contreras, and Albert Meijer. 2019. The Living Lab as a Methodology for Public Administration Research: A Systematic Literature Review of its Applications in the Social Sciences. International Journal of Public Administration 43: 1â11.
- Haukipuro, Lotta, and Satu Väinämö. 2019. Digital user involvement in a multi-context living lab environment. Technology Innovation Management Review 9: 27â37. [CrossRef] Haverland, Markus, and Dvora Yanow. 2012. A Hitchhikerâs Guide to the Public Administration Research Universe: Surviving Conversations on Methodologies and Methods. Public Administration Review 72: 401â8. [CrossRef] Hossain, Mokter, Seppo Leminen, and Mika Westerlund. 2019. A systematic review of living lab literature. Journal of Cleaner Production 213: 976â88. [CrossRef] Hyysalo, Sampsa, and Louna Hakkarainen. 2014. What difference does a living lab make? Comparing two health technology innovation projects. CoDesign 10: 191â208. [CrossRef] Jørgensen, Torben Beck, and Barry Bozeman. 2007. Public values: An inventory. Administration & Society 39: 354â81.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Journal of Educational Administration and History 47: 251â71. [CrossRef] Yin, Robert. 2014. Collecting Case Study Evidence: The Principles You Should Follow in Working with Six Sources of Evidence. In Case Study ResearchâDesign and Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 71â102.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
McGann, Michael, Emma Blomkamp, and Jenny M. Lewis. 2018. The rise of public sector innovation labs: Experiments in design thinking for policy. Policy Sciences 51: 249â67. [CrossRef] McGann, Michael, Tamas Wells, and Emma Blomkamp. 2019. Innovation labs and co-production in public problem solving. Public Management Review 23: 297â316. [CrossRef] Mergel, Ines. 2015. Opening government: Designing open innovation processes to collaborate with external problem solvers. Social Science Computer Review 33: 599â612. [CrossRef] Mergel, Ines. 2018. Open innovation in the public sector: Drivers and barriers for the adoption of Challenge.gov. Public Management Review 20: 726â45. [CrossRef] Miles, Matthew B., A. Michael Huberman, and Johnny Saldaña. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Moore, Mark H. 1995. Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Public Management Review 19: 640â54. [CrossRef] Carstensen, Helle Vibeke, and Christian Bason. 2012. Powering collaborative policy innovation: Can innovation labs help? Innovation Journal 17: 2â26.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Public Management Review 1â18. [CrossRef] Flick, Uwe. 2018. Interviews. In An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage, p. 207.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
- Saldaña, Johnny. 2016b. Second Cycle Coding Methods. In The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage, pp. 233â72.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Schuurman, Dimitri, and Piret Tõnurist. 2017. Innovation in the Public Sector: Exploring the Characteristics and Potential of Living Labs and innovation labs. Technology Innovation Management Review 7: 7â14. [CrossRef] Schuurman, Dimitri, Lieven De Marez, and Pieter Ballon. 2016. The impact of living lab methodology on open innovation contributions and outcomes. Technology Innovation Management Review 6: 7â16. [CrossRef] Seawright, Jason, and John Gerring. 2008. Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly 61: 294â308. [CrossRef] Sørensen, Eva, and Jacob Torfing. 2017. Metagoverning collaborative innovation in governance networks. The American Review of Public Administration 47: 826â39. [CrossRef] StÃ¥hlbröst, Anna. 2012. A set of key principles to assess the impact of Living Labs. International Journal of Product Development 17: 60â75.
Timeus, Krista, and Mila Gascó. 2018. Increasing innovation capacity in city governments: Do innovation labs make a difference? Journal of Urban Affairs 40: 992â1008. [CrossRef] Tõnurist, Piret, Rainer Kattel, and Veiko Lember. 2017. Innovation labs in the public sector: What they are and what they do? Public Management Review 19: 1455â79. [CrossRef] Torfing, Jacob. 2019. Collaborative innovation in the public sector: The argument. Public Management Review 21: 1â11. [CrossRef] Tummers, Lars, and Niels Karsten. 2012. Reflecting on the role of literature in qualitative public administration research: Learning from grounded theory. Administration & Society 44: 64â86.
Twizeyimana, Jean Damascene, and Annika Andersson. 2019. The public value of E-GovernmentâA literature review. Government Information Quarterly 36: 167â78. [CrossRef] Veeckman, Carina, and Laura Temmerman. 2021. Urban Living Labs and Citizen Science: From Innovation and Science towards Policy Impacts. Sustainability 13: 526. [CrossRef] Voorberg, William H., Viktor J. J. M. Bekkers, and Lars G. Tummers. 2015. A systematic review of co-creation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review 17: 1333â57. [CrossRef] Whicher, Anna, and Tom Crick. 2019. Co-design, evaluation and the Northern Ireland Innovation Lab. Public Money & Management 39: 290â99. [CrossRef] Williamson, Ben. 2015. Governing methods: Policy innovation labs, design and data science in the digital governance of education.
- Yin, Robert. 2016. Data Collection Methods. In Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 137â62.
Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
Zavratnik, Veronika, Argene Superina, and Emilija S. Duh. 2019. Living Labs for Rural Areas: Contextualization of Living Lab Frameworks, Concepts and Practices. Sustainability 11: 3797. [CrossRef] Zhang, Nan, Xuejiao Zhao, Zhongwen Zhang, Qingguo Meng, and Haibo Tan. 2017. What factors drive open innovation in Chinaâs public sector? A case study of official document exchange via microblogging (ODEM) in Haining. Government Information Quarterly 34: 126â33. [CrossRef]