1. INTRODUCTION
Biodiversity, environmental stewardship and even the continuity of life on Earth are urgent global concerns. These issues demand immediate and coordinated responses—something both the ecological movement and scientific communities have been calling for over the past decades (Bardi & Alvarez 2022; Meadows et al. 2004).
A meaningful response to this crisis requires not only technological innovation but also a profound critical reflection and a deep transformation of how cities are planned, designed, constructed and financed; how food systems are structured; how democratic processes, and social and gender equity are addressed and, fundamentally, how humans perceive and position themselves within ecosystems. This shift is vital for both the present and long-term wellbeing of future generations.
Nature, social equity, accessibility and the restoration of ecosystems have been emphasised by the European Union (EU) as urgent priorities. These goals require a radical reorientation of policymaking, along with the design of new socio-economic models and urban environments that regenerate rather than deplete natural systems.
Among the emerging conceptual frameworks seeking to respond to this challenge are nature-based solutions (NbS) (European Commission 2015; EEA 2024). NbS began to gain traction in the early 2010s through the work of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), summarised by Malan et al. (2016), and they have progressively moved into the global political agenda. NbS was formally defined at the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) in 2022, marking a turning point in their international recognition and policy relevance.
A growing body of literature (Frantzeskaki et al. 2019; Kabisch et al. 2016; Raymond et al. 2017) and research initiatives (Caitana & Canto 2024; Nunes et al. 2021) have explored the potential of NbS to mitigate the effects of climate change in urban areas, enhance social cohesion and foster citizen engagement. However, preliminary findings also reveal several limitations, particularly regarding their long-term implementation, integration into institutional frameworks, and their capacity to address systemic social and ecological inequalities (Seddon et al. 2020).
Building on these insights, this paper examines the methodological and empirical contributions of a living knowledge lab (LKL) implemented in rural municipalities in Cáceres (Extremadura, Spain) within the Horizon Europe TRANS-lighthouses project (2023–26). Using a qualitative and participatory approach, the study explores how inclusive NbS can be co-created and managed in low-density contexts. It addresses three guiding questions: how motivations, barriers and enabling factors shape co-creation; what forms of learning and institutional change emerge; and how these dynamics contribute to refining the LKL approach. Through this lens, the LKL investigates the social–ecological potential of NbS through situated experimentation and community engagement.
2. LKLs AS A TOOL FOR INCLUSIVE NbS
This section outlines the theoretical framework that positions LKLs as strategic tools for inclusive, context-sensitive NbS. It examines the evolution of living labs (LLs), critiques their limitations, and introduces LKLs as spaces for knowledge co-creation, empowerment and social transformation.
2.1 FROM LLs TO LKLs
The concept of an LL has been widely discussed since Bajgier et al. (1991). However, as several authors have observed (Leminen 2015; Lucchesi & Rutkowski 2019; Voytenko et al. 2016), there is no universally accepted definition. This conceptual openness offers flexibility for participatory knowledge generation across diverse contexts.
LLs are defined by the EU as:
user-centered, open innovation ecosystems based on a systematic user co-creation approach integrating research and innovation processes in real life communities and settings.
In practice, this implies centring citizens in innovation processes and aligning technological development with local needs and values.
The involvement of multiple actors and diverse forms of knowledge enhances the potential for developing socially and ecologically relevant solutions. The Quadruple Helix model (Carayannis & Campbell 2009), which integrates academia, industry, government and civil society, supports interdisciplinary collaboration and overcomes disciplinary silos, enabling integrated approaches to sustainability challenges (Lang et al. 2012; Santos 2014).
Engaging in co-creation processes fosters reflexivity, learning and empowerment (Bergold & Thomas 2012; Kemmis et al. 2014). Moreover, when the Quadruple Helix model includes marginalised knowledges, it becomes more inclusive and democratic.
The flexibility of the LL model allows it to adapt across multiple environments and territories—urban or rural, technologically advanced or based on traditional knowledge systems. From a practical standpoint, Westerlund & Leminen (2011) define LLs as experimental environments where public and private entities and people’s partnerships collaborate to create, validate, and test new services and systems in real-life contexts.
Reviews, such as that by Lupp et al. (2021), highlight the importance of inclusive co-creation, equity, governance and community agency. Nonetheless, LLs have been critiqued for occasionally serving top-down agendas, where co-creation merely validates pre-established solutions, rather than a truly collaborative process.
To address these limitations, the TRANS-lighthouses project introduces LKLs as an evolution of LLs. LKLs prioritise knowledge co-production, transdisciplinary learning, and inclusion of marginalised populations in innovation and territorial transformation. They emphasise collaborative knowledge construction over product or service development and are rooted in participatory action research (PAR), where researchers and communities co-generate knowledge that is both contextually grounded and transformative (Reason & Bradbury 2008).
While both LLs and LKLs are grounded in principles of collaboration and real-world experimentation, they differ in emphasis and orientation. LLs focus on developing and testing innovation, whereas LKLs place a stronger focus on the co-creation, exchange and collective application of knowledge among diverse actors. As Schaffers & Turkama (2012) describe it, these processes can be seen as an Ecosystem of Knowledge(s).
Participants do not merely produce knowledge—they engage in reflexive processes that challenge assumptions and dominant imaginaries, i.e. a process of unlearning (Nygren et al. 2017; van Oers et al. 2023). As Callorda et al. (2024) note, unlearning involves shedding dominant assumptions that inhibit transformation, enabling situated, embodied and just knowledges practices. Similarly, van Oers et al. (2023) argue that unlearning is a necessary step in transformative sustainability learning, creating the epistemic and emotional space for learners to reimagine their position within social–ecological systems.
This resonates with Freire’s (1970/2005) notion of conscientização, understood as a reflective awakening to the structural conditions shaping one’s reality and a commitment to transforming them. Unlearning becomes not only an epistemological process but also a political and ethical act, necessary for reorienting subjectivities toward more just, situated and relational modes of being.
Within this framework, the LKL emerges as a promising strategic tool for implementing NbS, especially in territories where complexity, inequality and environmental degradation require co-creation, reflexivity and care.
2.2 TOWARDS INCLUSIVE NbS
The biomimetic perspective laid the foundation of NbS, emphasising nature’s time-tested strategies for sustaining life (Benyus 1997; Riechmann 2006). Biomimicry reframes the human–nature relationship as one of embeddedness and reciprocity.
Emerging in the late 2000s, the concept of NbS was introduced by organisations such as the IUCN and World Bank as frameworks to address intertwined environmental and social challenges. Early reports, including that by Dudley et al. (2010), highlighted the role of nature in climate adaptation and risk reduction, and the term ‘nature-based solutions’ gained prominence in subsequent years. Academic contributions by Eggermont et al. (2015) and Faivre et al. (2017) further consolidated NbS as an umbrella concept encompassing ecosystem-based approaches, social innovation and sustainability-oriented planning.
As a result, NbS were challenged from a multidisciplinary perspective, seeking to merge ecological thinking with participatory and adaptive planning. This underscores the need to pursue not only environmental regeneration but also the strengthening of social equity and community resilience, often drawing on both traditional ecological knowledge and scientific research.
In the European context, several Horizon 2020 projects have advanced the conceptual and operational dimensions of NbS. Notably, the URBiNAT project (2018–24) integrated co-creation and human-centred design to foster inclusion in marginalised urban areas, creating multifunctional public spaces rooted in local needs and aspirations (Caitana & Canto 2024; Canto et al. 2022).
Addressing a different territorial context, the PHUSICOS project demonstrated the feasibility, scalability and cost-effectiveness of large-scale NbS in risk-prone areas, contributing valuable lessons on governance, landscape design and local resilience (Lupp et al. 2021) by combining ecological restoration with stakeholder engagement.
Building on the legacies of URBiNAT and PHUSICOS, the TRANS-lighthouses project (2023–26) develops a transdisciplinary model of NbS grounded in participatory governance, community empowerment and territorial justice. It seeks to operationalise NbS by integrating social innovation, ecological design and community-led governance across urban, rural, forestry and coastal contexts. Drawing on methodological advances from previous projects, it conceives NbS as catalysts for wider social–ecological transformation.
Despite growing recognition, NbS face critiques of technocracy and greenwashing that obscure structural inequalities (Seddon et al. 2020). Hence, scholars call for more inclusive, reflexive and politically aware approaches to their design and implementation.
The TRANS-lighthouses project underscores the importance of inclusive governance and co-creation through the learned lessons of assessment cases, and the co-design and co-monitoring of pilot cases. The project aims to generate NbS attuned to local dynamics, cultural specificity and the lived experiences of marginalised communities.
In this context, the LKL emerges as a collaborative platform with which to explore and prototype NbS tailored to the local realities of the Cáceres region, specifically decentralised composting as NbS, integrating diverse knowledge systems and fostering cooperation among regional stakeholders.
2.3 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN THE LKL
Community engagement is central to NbS, as it underpins social equity, local legitimacy and long-term sustainability (Frantzeskaki et al. 2019). However, NbS initiatives often adopt technocratic, top-down models that marginalised lay and place-based knowledge (Turnhout et al. 2016), generating mistrust and, what some scholars have termed the ‘social externalities of ecological experimentation’ (Bulkeley et al. 2018).
To counter these dynamics, NbS requires deliberative and participatory processes that incorporate diverse epistemologies into decision-making (Chambers 1997) and address epistemic injustice (Fricker 2007). LKLs provide such a framework by fostering co-creation between scientific and community actors, drawing on participatory science and epistemological pluralism (Irwin 1995; Santos 2014). They promote reflexive enquiry, resist knowledge hierarchies and enable translation across actor worlds (Latour 2004).
LKLs also integrate scientific and community-based experimentation through mixed methods, recognising grassroots innovations and supporting more just sustainability transitions (Lang et al. 2012; Scoones et al. 2020). Here, community participation is constitutive of the innovation process: participants act as co-creators motivated by values of care, justice and civic responsibility (Knowles 2006), strengthening the social embeddedness and durability of NbS.
Within the TRANS-lighthouses’ framework, emerging NbS projects seek to consolidate LKLs as community-led platforms through co-design and flexible, context-sensitive participatory methods. The next section illustrates how these principles materialise in the decentralised composting LKL in Cáceres.
3. CASE STUDY CONTEXT
3.1 CÁCERES PROVINCE
Cáceres province, in the Autonomous Community of Extremadura (south-western Spain) and bordering Portugal, is predominantly rural, with low population density and persistent demographic challenges such as ageing and youth outmigration (Junta de Extremadura 2022). Despite its rich natural and cultural heritage, the region has long experienced economic peripheralisation. The province includes 223 sparsely populated municipalities, many with fewer than 1000 inhabitants (Diputación de Cáceres 2023). While agriculture, livestock and forestry remain central to the economy, recent regional strategies increasingly promote rural innovation and bioeconomy (MAPA 2020).
This configuration needs a solid ecological response and presents both opportunities and constraints for the implementation of decentralised composting as an NbS. While the dispersed settlements and low organic waste generation create favourable conditions for decentralised composting, success still depends on local engagement, adaptable infrastructures and governance mechanisms (Figueiredo & Raschi 2013).
Spain’s current legal framework, aligned with EU directives and Ley 7/2022, mandates separate biowaste collection and targets a 50% reduction in municipal waste by 2030. These regulations encourage circular economy models and create a favourable context for municipalities to implement decentralised, participatory composting systems such as NbS.
Within this framework, the Cáceres LKL operates as both a research object and an infrastructure for experimentation and collective learning. A key site is the Mancomunidad Integral Sierra de Montánchez, an intermunicipal association comprising 21 rural municipalities (Figure 1). This territory constitutes a strategic setting providing a platform through which to explore decentralised composting as an NbS.
Figure 1
Scaled study area location map of the Sierra de Montánchez in Extremadura, Spain.
Source: Created by Enrique Ruiz Labrador (University of Extremadura) and reproduced with permission.
The Sierra de Montánchez case study offers insights into the socio-political dynamics, governance innovations, and collaborative processes that drive inclusive and sustainable territorial transformation. It demonstrates how the LKL approach can be embedded within real-world contexts to generate situated knowledge and foster transformative practices.
3.2 DECENTRALISED COMPOSTING LKL
Global waste generation continues to rise, and centralised waste-management systems entail significant environmental and social costs. In this context, decentralised composting has gained traction as a viable NbS offering localised organic-waste treatment through community-based or small-scale infrastructures (Rao & Parsai 2023). It refers to small- or medium-scale systems located close to the point of waste generation and managed by households, community groups, neighbourhood associations, local authorities or inter-municipal entities, avoiding large industrial facilities. This approach reduces greenhouse gas emissions, supports soil regeneration and fosters territorial circularity (Manea et al. 2024). Organic waste represents more than 50% of municipal solid waste globally, much of which still ends up in landfills or incinerators, exacerbating climate change and resource depletion.
In Spain, despite regulatory efforts aligned with the European Green Deal and the Circular Economy Action Plan, biowaste remains insufficiently managed in many municipalities (European Commission 2020). Responding to this challenge, the European Waste Directive 2018/851 (European Union 2018) and Spain’s Ley 7/2022 require all municipalities to implement separate biowaste collection and treatment—through either household and community composting or dedicated facilities—while shifting waste-management costs to citizens through service fees.
Although this framework presents implementation challenges, particularly for small and rural municipalities, it also offers an opportunity to redesign waste systems toward greater efficiency, social engagement and ecological regeneration. The Cáceres LKL functions as a collaborative platform through which to prototype locally adapted NbS, integrate diverse knowledge systems, and promote participatory and decentralised approaches.
Framing composting as an NbS underscores its capacity to co-generate ecological and social benefits by transforming human–organic matter relationships and advancing community-driven sustainability transitions (Frantzeskaki et al. 2019; Raymond et al. 2017). Decentralised composting is defined as a suitable NbS and a synergistic satisfier, as it reduces organic waste while closing local nutrient loops through compost production and strengthening civic engagement (Izdebska & Knieling 2020).
The Cáceres LKL activates territorial intelligence by connecting actors from academic, public, private and civil society sectors. Led by Economías BioRegionales (EBR) (a non-governmental organisation—NGO) and the University of Extremadura (UEx), it promotes co-creation, cultural unlearning and participatory governance related to organic-waste management. Its networked nature brings together actors who previously worked in isolation, enabling the co-design of local composting models that reflect diverse motivations and concerns. These actors, in turn, initiate new participatory processes within their own municipalities, expanding the LKL’s influence across the territory.
3.3 A LIVING NETWORK OF ACTORS AND KNOWLEDGE
The strength of this LKL lies in its capacity to weave together previously disconnected actors across the province, creating a shared space to collaboratively envision and design decentralised composting models. This process acknowledges diverse motivations, capacities and resistances. Moreover, each participating actor amplifies the lab’s impact by initiating new local processes of co-creation and participation that, in turn, feed back into and enrich the LKL ecosystem.
In a region where historically low civic participation—partly shaped by long-standing cultural legacies from the dictatorship period—and limited composting practices persist, due to the continued use of organic waste for feeding livestock, the LKL operates as a decentralised network of interconnected nodes, reflecting the dispersed and rural character of the province of Cáceres. The initial activation of the territory, led by EBR and UEx, involved a series of decentralised composting-focused strategies. These actions paved the way for the development of the LKL analysed in this case study (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Actions leading to the Cáceres living knowledge lab (LKL).
3.4 DESIGNING COLLABORATIVE PROCESSES
To frame the co-creation process effectively, it is essential to understand socio-cultural factors to identify barriers and develop strategies to overcome them. Following the stepwise approach typical of LLs (Ferreira et al. 2023), the Cáceres LKL unfolded through three main phases.
Co-diagnostic
Co-diagnostic identifies the key challenges and stakeholders using cultural mapping to explore local knowledge ecosystems and participatory cultures. Stakeholders include individuals, communities, organisations and institutions engaged in co-designing and managing NbS.
Co-design and prototyping
The second phase focuses on the co-design and prototyping of local NbS, addressing resistances, needs and synergies. Diverse stakeholders apply unlearning methodologies to build shared understanding and critically reflect on waste practices ensuring relevance and sustained community engagement.
Co-implementation
Co-implementation engages stakeholders in putting the NbS into practice—a transformative step that can catalyse broader social change when rooted in local cultural practices. Rural conditions in Cáceres make participation accessible and cost-effective, with community members actively contributing to organic waste collection alongside training and awareness initiatives.
4. METHODS
This section outlines the methodological approach for exploring decentralised composting as an NbS through the Cáceres LKL. The methodological design responds to three interconnected research objectives that guide the multi-method and participatory approach adopted in the LKL. First, the study examines the motivations, barriers, and enabling conditions that shape residents’ and stakeholders’ participation in the implementation of decentralised composting as an NbS. This includes exploring initial drivers for engagement, perceived resistances and the ways in which participation evolves through the situated dynamics of the LKL (addressed in Sections 5.1 and 5.5).
Second, the research analyses how the LKL contributes to emerging governance models, community engagement and processes of territorial learning. Particular attention is placed here on whether the LKL fosters a critical awareness among stakeholders and to what extent it facilitates transitions from traditional knowledge-transfer approaches towards co-production, mutual learning and intercultural dialogue of knowledges. These questions orient the analysis of the LKL as a socio-technical and reflexive interface that connects institutional, civic and ecological dimensions of NbS implementation (Sections 5.2 and 5.4).
Finally, the study investigates whether gender differences shape participation, engagement and role distribution within LKL activities, assessing how gendered dynamics influence co-creation processes and collective learning in community-based composting (Section 5.3).
The analytical strategy followed an inductive and iterative logic consistent with qualitative and participatory research traditions. Instead of applying predefined categories, analytical themes emerged progressively through repeated engagement with the empirical materials: interviews, participant observation notes, reflexive self-observation, forum theatre outputs, unlearning workshop records and analytical reports. This approach enabled attention to be paid to unexpected dynamics, situated meanings and evolving forms of engagement within the LKL.
The study adopts a qualitative, multi-method design grounded in an interpretivist paradigm (Denzin & Lincoln 2018; Flick 2014) and framed as an embedded case study (Stake 1995). This framework supports in-depth examination of community-led responses to social–environmental challenges—in this case, decentralised composting—within their real-life context. The Cáceres LKL operates as a living case in which multiple methods capture actors’ perceptions, roles and co-creation dynamics.
A participatory methodological strategy was employed to trace emergent processes, meaning-making and institutional change as they unfolded, rather than measuring predefined variables. The multi-method design combined participant observation, semi-structured interviews, PAR workshops (forum theatre and unlearning sessions), and content analysis of the digital co-creation platforms used in the LKL. Continuous reflexive monitoring complemented these techniques with researchers engaging in systematic self-observation to acknowledge positionality and track processes of knowledge co-production (Reason & Bradbury 2008). As Serrano & Gordo (2009) argue, reflexivity is central to qualitative enquiry, particularly in contexts such as LKLs where co-creation evolves over time and cannot be predetermined.
The following describes how each method was operationalised within this design.
Participant observation
Participant observation was conducted throughout LKL activities—including community meetings, training sessions and field visits involving civil society groups, entrepreneurs and policymakers—allowing the research team to observe everyday interactions, governance dynamics and emerging forms of collaboration within the composting network.
Semi-structured interviews
A total of nine interviews were conducted with NGOs (four), municipal representative (one), technician (one) and community stakeholders (three). The interviews explored participants’ perceptions of co-creation processes, motivations and resistances, the inclusion of marginalised groups, and the perceived feasibility and scalability of decentralised composting.
Forum theatre
The forum theatre was a three-hour in-person session, conducted during the first composting training in 2023, held with 20 participants from civil society, public and private sectors. Drawing on Boal (1980), it facilitated collective exploration of the tensions, structural constraints and cultural resistances in biowaste governance, while generating situated alternatives.
Unlearning workshops
Two workshops held in 2024—one four-hour in-person and one online—engaged 15 participants—including NGOs (three), university researchers (six), a regional research centre (two), the Public Waste Management Consortium (two), a municipal representative (one) and the association of 21 rural municipalities (one)—and applied frameworks by Nygren et al. (2017) and van Oers et al. (2023) to elicit critical reflection on dominant assumptions and institutional barriers. These sessions created spaces to question existing narratives around waste, participation and decentralisation, and to envision alternative governance models.
Content analysis of digital communication channels
The content analysis of digital communication channels analysed the LKL’s Telegram group (73 participants) and the Agent for Organic Change (Agente de Cambio Orgánico—ACO) network’s WhatsApp group (22 participants) to map informal learning, peer-to-peer knowledge exchange and everyday coordination, understanding the socio-cultural dynamics of the Cáceres LKL and its contribution to decentralised composting as an NbS.
Reflexive self-observation
Reflexive self-observation documented researchers’ evolving roles, assumptions and learning trajectories, making explicit how positionality shaped knowledge co-production and aligning the process with the study’s relational epistemology.
5. FINDINGS
5.1 MOTIVATION FOR IMPLEMENTING DECENTRALISED COMPOSTING
The broader implementation of decentralised composting as an NbS in the province of Cáceres does not seem to be driven by deep ecological awareness or systemic socio-environmental commitment. Instead, at the political level, motivations are primarily extrinsic and perceived as externally imposed, shaped by the need to comply with EU regulations to avoid financial consequences for municipalities. Participant observation and interviews with mayors and technicians consistently reflected this sentiment.
although it may seem sad, it’s the reality. In the end, what affects us all is our wallets, the economy. […] There’s no doubt that there’s an environmental aspect. […] But in the end, what’s compelling is the economic aspect, and that’s what affects both the administration and the residents […] who are the ones who give the money to the administration.
(Interview_7_Municipal representative)
This testimony shows how initially extrinsic motivations may evolve into normalised and internalised practices over time. While current policy frames participation in composting as regulatory compliance, interviews suggest a hopeful intergenerational dynamic: duties performed today may become habitual behaviours for future generations:
in the end it does have an influence, and obviously, this happens generation after generation, that is, once someone does it, motivated by one thing, but in the end, the children will see it as common and normal, not because of the economic aspect, but because it was what was done, their parents did, and so on.
(Interview_7_Municipal representative)
This illustrates how environmental behaviours can shift from obligation to habitual citizenship, with long-term cultural transformation emerge from short-term compliance.
Yet institutional commitment remains fragile and contingent:
Those who have gone ahead, because it’s free, I just have to provide the work for my operators. And if my neighbors don’t like it, well, I’ll just take it down and find another solution to manage it. […] If they had had to buy all the equipment from the start, probably not, we wouldn’t be talking about any of them at all.
(Interview_5_Technician)
This reflects a pragmatic view: the adoption of composting practices largely depends on external funding and minimising political risk rather than a proactive environmental agenda.
5.2 FOSTERING CRITICAL AWARENESS AND DIALOGUE
Observations from the forum theatre workshop indicate that LKLs operate as strategic tools not only for knowledge co-production but also for fostering critical reflection on participant’s roles, assumptions and capacities for change:
If we stick to our own idea and how we think we should do things, we generally won’t be able to make the transformative change we envision.
(ForumTheater_Civil society_18)
These labs foster an awareness of systemic injustices and ecological challenges, encouraging participants to see themselves as both subjects and agents within broader social–ecological transitions:
And above all, empathize […] that’s the key for us all to pull together in the end. We have to convince ourselves through conscience, not obligation, and find the right approach.
(ForumTheater_Public sector_7)
Among the interviewed stakeholders, diverse discourses and practices emerged around decentralised composting and other NbS. In contexts where technical expertise intersects with ecological awareness, strong local leaders often act as pivotal agents of bottom-up change, mobilising their communities, fostering ecological literacy and bridging institutional agendas with local aspirations. In some municipalities, however, emerging community agency faced institutional resistance, reflecting tensions between participatory initiatives and traditional top-down governance:
It might be even worse, because maybe the technician will say, ‘I don’t see it.’ What’s more, at the inter-municipal level, that project was accepted, but at the local level, it wasn’t, and it’s the same technician.
(Interview_6_Community member_2)
5.3 WOMEN’S ROLE
Although men constitute the majority among municipal workers involved in composting activities, observations and interviews highlight that women—particularly elder women—are key actors in decentralised initiatives, acting as relational anchors and knowledge holders. As custodians of traditional ecological knowledge, they provide stability and emotional labour during environmental transitions:
to give you an idea, the ones responsible for the renewal of the senior citizens’ association were women. I think that’s something we have to be aware of: those who participate in our social structure are the way we were raised and all that. Those who energize rural life are women.
(Interview_6_Community member_1)
In the Cáceres’ LKL territory, elder women often drive participation and ensure continuity, attending meetings, maintaining composting sites and mobilising neighborhood involvement:
For the most part, it’s the women of the municipality, between 50 and 70 years old, that age group who are the most active. In the end, I repeat, they are also the most numerous on average […] they’re the first ones here.
(Interview_7_Municipal representative)
These women embody everyday environmental leadership, rooted in care, relationality and sustained communal commitment: ‘Women are the ones who move everything, the whole thing’ (Interview_5_Technician).
Their presence illustrates how gendered and generational roles structure the social infrastructure of NbS and positions the LKL as both a strategic tool for technical experimentation and a pedagogical and affective commons.
5.4 ENABLING MUTUAL LEARNING AND SYSTEMIC CHANGE
Through sustained interaction among community members, researchers, institutions and practitioners, LKLs generate solutions while fostering personal and social transformation, promoting a culture of participation grounded in reflection, trust and mutual recognition.
This transformation extends beyond communities, private actors or elected representatives, reshaping the practices and identities of traditional knowledge custodians. Organisations such as EBR, delivering technical composting training, and academic actors from the UEx exemplify this shift, moving from information dissemination to awareness-raising and reorientation. The participant university staff, for instance, now recognise composting as both an ecological necessity and a pedagogical strategy, initiating decentralised composting projects on their campuses.1 EBR has similarly expanded its conceptual and methodological frameworks, integrating social dimensions into ecological and technical training programmes called Agent for Organic Change (Agente de Cambio Orgánico—ACO) across Spain. This illustrates how NGOs can evolve into transition agents through reflexivity, relational learning and systemic thinking.
Participant observation also shows that NGOs and universities can facilitate not only knowledge exchange but also a dialogue between politics and communities, enabling broader social transformation.
A key challenge in the Cáceres LKL is resisting top-down knowledge hierarchies, which risk sidelining experiential, tacit, and relational knowledge and turning the LKL into a technocratic extension of policy. Many impactful initiatives originate from community leaders, elder women, farmers and local activists, whose insights stem from embodied experience, care work and situated ecological practices. Integrating these forms of knowledge requires an epistemic shift: from extraction to dialogue, from dissemination to co-production. Without this shift, the LKL risks reproducing existing asymmetries. Building truly inclusive and plural LKLs therefore demands institutional humility, active listening and horizontal platforms where all actors can meaningfully contribute to the design of NbS.
5.5 LOCAL LEGISLATION AND THE CHALLENGES OF REAL PARTICIPATION
Despite the transformative potential of decentralised composting and the grassroots energy mobilised through the Cáceres LKL, local legislative frameworks often lag or constrain participatory governance. Many municipal regulations were designed for centralised waste management and fail to accommodate community-led or semi-formal composting initiatives:
The problem here is that we depend on help, and of course, you can’t get out of that situation, but what needs to happen is a level playing field between entities.
(Interview_5_Technician)
Legal ambiguities around compost classification, health and safety, or land use generate uncertainty and risk aversion among citizens and officials, undermining bottom-up efforts.
The NGO EBR and other composting networks, such as Composta en Red, advocate for local regulations that translate national waste legislation into context-sensitive policies. Yet, in Cáceres, a historically weak participatory culture and limited citizen engagement often result in technocratic governance, where administrations retain control over environmental interventions:
In the meetings we’ve had over the last two years, when we talked about co-design participation, they said: no, waste isn’t something to be shared about, those of us who know about waste know how to solve it and people can just put their trash where we tell them.
(Interview_4_NGO_4)
Regulatory innovation must be paired with the activation of participatory political cultures. New frameworks should embed mechanisms for co-governance and co-monitoring to advance decentralised composting and foster inclusive, place-based governance.
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The living knowledge lab (LKL) as a strategic tool offers a concrete response to address sustainability challenges by acting as a transformative infrastructure that enables collective enquiry, shared learning and political empowerment. Rather than treating innovation as a purely instrumental process, the LKL embeds learning in lived practice, dialogue and situated experience (Fals-Borda & Rahman 1991; Schäpke et al. 2018). Through these elements, it contributes to the gradual development of participatory dispositions and democratic ecological governance—particularly relevant in contexts where traditional governance models have historically marginalised local voices (Malik et al. 2021).
As evidenced by studies such as that by Farhidi et al. (2022), decentralised composting is one of the most accessible and low-cost nature-based solutions (NbS) for waste reduction, yet its implementation in Cáceres depends heavily on external financial support. Funding operates simultaneously as an enabler and a buffer, making experimentation possible while reducing perceived political and social risks (Wüstenhagen 2008). Without such economic backing, many municipalities would likely not have adopted these initiatives, revealing a reliance on short-term incentives rather than on long-term environmental commitment (Frantzeskaki et al. 2017). This dependency raises concerns about the sustainability and scalability of decentralised composting in the absence of systemic support and deeper cultural integration (Baker & Mehmood 2015).
This incentive-driven framing—reinforced by the perception of external regulatory and economic pressure—often reduces NbS to bureaucratic obligations rather than situating them within broader ecological transitions. Municipal narratives frequently emphasise compliance and cost avoidance (EEA 2024). However, the findings show that, beyond institutional pragmatism, cultural change is gradually emerging through everyday practices, intergenerational socialisation and community engagement.
Central to these dynamics are elder women, whose tacit knowledge, care work and relational leadership make them key agents of ecological stewardship and social cohesion. Their involvement shows that community-based innovation relies not only on technical skills but also on relational infrastructures and affective economies (Puig de la Bellacasa 2017). Through their practices, composting becomes a form of social–ecological care, highlighting the plurality of knowledge and the need to recognise diverse epistemic subjects in sustainability transitions (Santos 2014).
These findings highlight the importance of strengthening bottom-up agency, acknowledging pluriversal knowledge and embracing social–ecological care as a foundational of sustainability transformations. Yet such processes must be balanced to avoid tensions between participatory initiatives and entrenched top-down governance, reinforcing the need for middle-out approaches capable of mediating between both domains (Bulkeley et al. 2018; Fernández-Pacheco Sáez 2017).
Regulation, in this sense, is not merely procedural but can function as a cultural and pedagogical tool that cultivates new forms of co-responsibility (Fung 2006; Hajer 2003). By institutionalising participation, municipalities move beyond voluntarism and symbolic consultation toward more robust forms of co-governance that acknowledge and nurture local political capacities (Michels 2011). The investigative role within the LKL reflects broader shifts in which knowledge institutions act not as neutral transmitters but as active participants in co-learning and socio-environmental transformation (Fals-Borda & Rahman 1991; Schäpke et al. 2018). This aligns with transdisciplinary and action-oriented approaches grounded in mutual learning, reflexivity, and commitments to sustainability transitions (Lang et al. 2012; Scoones et al. 2020).
Although this paper does not yet present a complete analysis of the full dataset generated by the Cáceres LKL, it provides a robust overview of the emerging dynamics and key insights captured through forum theatre, unlearning workshops, interviews and participant observation. These methods illuminate the complex interplay of motivations, resistances and capacities that shape the implementation of decentralised composting as an inclusive NbS within the TRANS-lighthouses framework.
Regarding limitations, it is important to acknowledge that the findings are context specific and reflect the early stages of LKL development; the results may evolve as the initiative matures, and some insights may be influenced by the researchers’ positionality and the participatory nature of the methods employed.
Overall, the Cáceres LKL demonstrates its value as a strategic tool for experimenting with new governance models and implementing NbS, such as decentralised composting, while incorporating participants’ voices from the outset. Early, meaningful engagement, grounded in stakeholders’ motivations and interests, fosters an awareness of the importance of participation and strengthens conditions for sustainable, place-based environmental governance.
Notes
[1] For information about this composting process at the UEX campus during the TRANS-lighthouses project, see https://www.instagram.com/TRANS-lighthouses_caceres/.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the entire team at Economías BioRegionales for their unwavering commitment to the Cáceres pilot case. They are deeply grateful to Franco Llobera and Mónica Cuende, whose remarkable and essential work in leading the implementation process was key to making this initiative possible. The authors also extend their appreciation to their colleagues Ela Callorda and Andreia LeMaître from UCL for their valuable collaboration in the unlearning workshop, which greatly contributed to the methodological richness of this research.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
All four authors contributed substantially to the development of this article. Contributions included conceptualisation of the study, data collection and curation, research design, and development of the methodological approach. Project coordination was led by the corresponding author, with contributions from the full team. All authors participated in the formal analysis, validation of findings and drafting of the manuscript. Each author was involved in writing, critical review and editing, ensuring the coherence, accuracy and scientific quality of the final version.
COMPETING INTERESTS
The authors have no competing interests to declare.
DATA ACCESSIBILITY
The data from this study are publicly available in the TRANS-lighthouses community on Zenodo.
ETHICAL APPROVAL
The Bioethics and Biosafety Commission of the University of Extremadura (CBBUEx) reviewed the research project ‘More than Green—Lighthouses of Transformative Nature-based Solutions for Inclusive Communities’, led by principal investigator Dr José Luis Fernández-Pacheco Sáez, during its session held on 21 January 2025. The committee unanimously approved the project, recognizing that it complies with essential ethical standards and adheres to all applicable regulations in force.