11 Real-World Laboratories Initiated by Practitioner …
213
political processes in concrete social contexts (Schäpke et al. 2017: 4). According to
the definition coined by Gross et al. (2005), a hybrid form of the experiment is associated with this term, ranging between the production and application of knowledge
and situation-specific and controlled boundary conditions (Schneidewind 2014: 2).
Conceptually, real-world laboratories therefore build on the ‘experimental turn’ in
the social, economic and sustainability sciences, and are similar to other transdisciplinary and participatory research approaches such as transdisciplinary case studies,
participatory action research, fieldwork, intervention research or transition research
(Schäpke et al. 2017: 4, referring in each case to prominent representatives of the
approaches named).
In the scientific landscape, the concept of the real-world laboratory is therefore
easily expandable and currently formative. In practice, however, the term is rejected
by some because it evokes associations that experiments are being performed on
the participants (Grießhammer and Brohmann 2015: 22). The term “urban laboratory” proved to be useful for work in the “The re-productive town” project. This
is because the term is used in the field of urban development, albeit with diverse
and different meanings, such as for educational institutions with an experimental
laboratory character.
In order to shed light on what characterises real-world laboratories that have
been initiated and largely shaped by practitioner stakeholders, we refer below to the
core characteristics listed by Parodi et al. (2016): research orientation, normativity,
transdisciplinarity, transformativity, civil society orientation/participation, long-term
nature and laboratory character (see Table 11.1). These core characteristics largely
correspond to or overlap with characterisations proposed by other authors such as
WBGU (2016), Schäpke et al. (2017), Defila and Di Giulio (2018a). We add another
core feature—continuous processes of reflection and learning with regard to one’s
own research practice and social effect; these characterise the research process (e.g.
Schäpke et al. 2018b; Schneidewind and Singer-Brodowski 2015).
Based on these core characteristics, an outline is given below of how real-world
laboratories initiated and coordinated by EAA can be characterised, whether and
how they differ from those real-world laboratories that are initiated and coordinated
by stakeholders from science, whether they face challenges and, if so, what those
challenges are. The definition of the relevant core characteristics is given in Table
11.1.
11.3.1 Regarding Research Orientation
In the Anhalt Real-World Laboratory ‘as a whole’, the EAA association offers interested researchers the region’s problems concerning energy design, energy policy and
energy management, some of which have already been formulated and structured;
its contacts with regional practitioner stakeholders; and its expertise in the development of a sustainable regional energy system for transdisciplinary research. In this
sense, EAA serves as an institution for sustainability and transformation research;
213
political processes in concrete social contexts (Schäpke et al. 2017: 4). According to
the definition coined by Gross et al. (2005), a hybrid form of the experiment is associated with this term, ranging between the production and application of knowledge
and situation-specific and controlled boundary conditions (Schneidewind 2014: 2).
Conceptually, real-world laboratories therefore build on the ‘experimental turn’ in
the social, economic and sustainability sciences, and are similar to other transdisciplinary and participatory research approaches such as transdisciplinary case studies,
participatory action research, fieldwork, intervention research or transition research
(Schäpke et al. 2017: 4, referring in each case to prominent representatives of the
approaches named).
In the scientific landscape, the concept of the real-world laboratory is therefore
easily expandable and currently formative. In practice, however, the term is rejected
by some because it evokes associations that experiments are being performed on
the participants (Grießhammer and Brohmann 2015: 22). The term “urban laboratory” proved to be useful for work in the “The re-productive town” project. This
is because the term is used in the field of urban development, albeit with diverse
and different meanings, such as for educational institutions with an experimental
laboratory character.
In order to shed light on what characterises real-world laboratories that have
been initiated and largely shaped by practitioner stakeholders, we refer below to the
core characteristics listed by Parodi et al. (2016): research orientation, normativity,
transdisciplinarity, transformativity, civil society orientation/participation, long-term
nature and laboratory character (see Table 11.1). These core characteristics largely
correspond to or overlap with characterisations proposed by other authors such as
WBGU (2016), Schäpke et al. (2017), Defila and Di Giulio (2018a). We add another
core feature—continuous processes of reflection and learning with regard to one’s
own research practice and social effect; these characterise the research process (e.g.
Schäpke et al. 2018b; Schneidewind and Singer-Brodowski 2015).
Based on these core characteristics, an outline is given below of how real-world
laboratories initiated and coordinated by EAA can be characterised, whether and
how they differ from those real-world laboratories that are initiated and coordinated
by stakeholders from science, whether they face challenges and, if so, what those
challenges are. The definition of the relevant core characteristics is given in Table
11.1.
11.3.1 Regarding Research Orientation
In the Anhalt Real-World Laboratory ‘as a whole’, the EAA association offers interested researchers the region’s problems concerning energy design, energy policy and
energy management, some of which have already been formulated and structured;
its contacts with regional practitioner stakeholders; and its expertise in the development of a sustainable regional energy system for transdisciplinary research. In this
sense, EAA serves as an institution for sustainability and transformation research;