Paper short abstract:

Living Labs engage diverse actors in collaborative problem-solving. This fosters peculiar epistemic processes, largely unexplored in research. Integrating Social Epistemology, I investigate how LL formats influence knowledge transfer. Findings reveal a range of innovative formats for novel insights

Paper long abstract:

Living Labs have been implemented as new format for knowledge transfer and a collaborative way of knowledge production by scientists and several actors from different social spheres. In Living Labs several actors with diverse backgrounds and epistemic practices, work together to find solutions for a spectrum of sustainability problems.

This contribution addresses the question whether other formats of knowledge production and transfer relate to the quality of this knowledge. Statements about the epistemic benefit of specific methods or formats in LLs besides success factors (Bergmann, Schäpke et al. 2021) have not been in the focus of research by now, my aim is here to connect these questions with central tenets from Social Epistemology. Epistemically, Living Labs are hard to describe, as diverse knowledge types and practices are apparent. Living Labs can contribute to the social and political dimension of science if the formats of knowledge co-production, co-evaluation or transfer align with the goals and topics which occur in the individual living lab.

Based on 30 qualitative interviews and ethnographical data, e.g. participant observation from open (presentations, citizen conferences) and closed formats (meetings, workshops), efforts in varying formats for uni- and bidirectional knowledge transfer can be seen. Here various new formats exist, ranging from self-experiments, focus groups to dance performances. The new and unique knowledge they produce, should be moved into the focus of (Social) Epistemology.