Abstract
Urban living labs (ULLs) are experimental governance mechanisms accelerating sustainability transitions in the built environment, yet their governance implications and systemic impact are often under-examined. A comparative analysis of six ULLs is presented with a focus on positive energy districts (PEDs) and energy communities (ECs) in Austria, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands. Stakeholder configurations, governance models and value creation processes are analysed using structured case documentation and a multitheoretical lens combining the multi-level perspective (MLP), ULL frameworks, innovation ecosystem theory and the Cambridge Value Mapping Tool (CVMT). Substantial variation is revealed in governance, ranging from centralised, municipality-led models to distributed, cooperative or academic leadership. Mapping stakeholder networks across MLP levels uncovers critical tensions between regime incumbents and niche actors. CVMT analysis demonstrates that value creation is multidimensional (economic, environmental, social) but often uneven, with missed or destroyed value linked to governance misalignment or limited stakeholder engagement. It is argued that ULLs function as infrastructures for transition governance, not merely technical testbeds. Their success relies on their capacity to align multi-actor systems, mediate institutional frictions and co-produce shared value. Findings offer actionable insights for designing ULLs that are technically effective and socially embedded for just and sustainable urban energy transitions.
Practice relevance
This study provides practical insights for stakeholders involved in the development of PEDs and ECs through ULLs. First, the analysis highlights that governance models play a critical role – distributed and inclusive structures tend to foster trust, legitimacy and sustained innovation, while centralised, siloed models often lead to missed or destroyed value. Second, successful ULLs rely on strong stakeholder alignment across different institutional levels, enabling systemic change and the embedding of new practices. Third, value creation in ULLs is multidimensional – economic, social and environmental – and tools like the CVMT are essential for identifying opportunities and avoiding value loss. Fourth, co-creation processes that involve citizens meaningfully improve acceptance, adaptability and long-term impact. Finally, ULLs should be understood not merely as project testbeds but as infrastructures for transition, capable of bridging the gap between innovation and policy to support just and sustainable energy futures.