Abstract
The article elaborates the background thinking and path for Open Innovation 2.0 conceptual innovation model. It is based on virtual enterprises, Holonic enterprises and fractal enterprises theory, combined with MIT Living Lab concept developed by Bill Mitchell (Me++: the cyborg self and the networked city. MIT Press; 2003). Combining this with the internet/connectivity revolution the need to have faster pace and more successful innovation rate led to the thinking of the quadruple helix, including the citizens as active agents in the innovation process, not only as verificators as they were used to be in the previous triple helix thinking.
Based on the work of New Club of Paris (Lin and Edvinsson. National intellectual capital: a comparison of 40 countries. Springer; 2011) the structural intellectual capital (IC) is a key for national prosperity. Open innovation integrating the crowd into the innovation process seamlessly seems to increase the structural IC. Hence, integrating all these components: quadruple helix, non-linear innovation, fractal and dynamic organizations into innovation processes in real world with real market creation with the users who become co-creators seem to be the key for future success.
The new open innovation 2.0 paradigm seems to be serving the innovation needs very well in timeāif we dare to take it on board.
References
Bergvall-KĆ„reborn B, StĆ„hlbrƶst A (2009) Living Lab: an open and citizen-centric approach for Innovation. Int J Innov Reg Dev 1(4):356ā358
Chesbrough HW (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press, Boston, MA
Edquist C (2014) Striving towards a holistic innovation policy in European countries ā but linearity still prevails! STI Policy Rev 5(2), Lund University, Lund. https://charlesedquist.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/step-2014-v5-no2_01.pdf
ENoLL ā European Network of Living Labs (2015) http://www.openlivinglabs.eu/. Accessed 26 Aug 2015
LeitĆ£o Paulo JP (2004) An agile and adaptive holonic architecture for manufacturing control. PhD Thesis, University of Porto
Lin C, Edvinsson L (2011) National intellectual capital: a comparison of 40 countries. Springer, New York
Lucassen I, Klievink AJ, Tavasszy LA (2014) A living lab framework: facilitating the adoption of innovations in international information infrastructures. In: Proceedings of transport research arena 2014, Paris, France, p 5
Mitchell WJ (2003) Me++: the cyborg self and the networked city. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Niitamo VP, Kulkki S, Eriksson M, Hribernik KA (2006) State-of-the-art and good practice in the field of living labs. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on concurrent enterprising: innovative products and services through collaborative networks (Italy: Milan), pp 26ā28
Tharumarajah A, Wells AJ, Nemes L (1996) Comparison of emerging manufacturing concepts. CSIRO manufacturing science & technology, Preston, Victoria, Australia. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 9(3):217ā226. www.fractal.org/Fractal-Research-and-Products/Fractalfactory.pdf
van der Walt JS, Buitendag AAK, Zaaiman JJ, van Vuuren JCJ (2009) Community living lab as a collaborative innovation environment. Issues Inform Sci Inf Technol 6:430
Von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing innovation. MIT Press, Boston
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
Ā© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dias, A., Salmelin, B. (2018). Living Labs and Open Innovation in European Context. In: Dias, A., Salmelin, B., Pereira, D., Dias, M. (eds) Modeling Innovation Sustainability and Technologies. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67101-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67101-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67100-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67101-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)