Investigates agroecological strategies in living labs, highlighting participatory challenges and recommendations.
In the context of the current need for agricultural transition towards more sustainable systems and the general increase in participatory approaches in environmental studies, a living lab approach seems to be promising. Indeed, living laboratories are encouraged by the need for more co-constructed and transdisciplinary research involving scientists and societal stakeholders, in order to understand and implement agroecological measures in a more effective way than what could be reached by simply using experimental sites. Yet, living labs remain a broad concept with multiple understandings which may hinder their successful implementation. Via living labs developed by the research sector in five sites across Europe, our international research project investigates floral enrichment in wheat fields. We examined how different actors apprehended the living labs in an agroecological project by tracing the translation phases of the Actor Network Theory (ANT), in particular the problematization, interessement, and enrolment phases. Our results highlight the influence of research funding schemes in the use of the living lab approach and the importance of the interessement phase for both researchers' and farmers' further enrolment. Our results showcase the challenges of using this approach when actors’ objectives and willingness to use participatory approaches are not sufficiently shared. We then propose four recommendations: better align research policies with the exploratory nature of living labs; define a clear, shared scope to foster a common identity among actors; treat living labs as long-term approaches that allow actors to shape and redefine shared boundaries over time to sustain their enrolment; and recognise that the geographical location of living labs influences research questions, rather than the reverse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Agasse et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: