New Environments for the Evaluation of Smart Living Solutions

  • Beatriz Merino BarbanchoEmail author
  • Ivana Lombroni
  • Cecilia Vera-Muñoz
  • María Teresa Arredondo
Part of the Computer Communications and Networks book series (CCN)


In recent years, the evolution of the technology and its adoption by the citizens has made possible the inclusion of new tools in the innovation processes. These tools have allowed the development of better products and services and the reduction of the time to market of these solutions for the benefit of all end users. In this context, the concept of Living Lab has emerged, as an open innovation ecosystem where stakeholders, including professionals, developers and end users, can cooperate on solutions to address relevant challenges using co-creation and evaluation methodologies. Living Labs can support and enhance the innovation process throughout the different phases of the value chain, and they can also act as the connectors between the needs (the users) and the offer (the suppliers). This chapter presents the Living Labs as the novel instruments for evaluating, assessing and validating innovative products, solutions or services in the particular domain of smart living environments.


Living labs Innovation Validation and evaluation Market access 



The authors would like to thank the following projects for the valuable contributions to the elaboration of this chapter: EIT Health Living Labs and Test Beds project (2016–2019), EIT Health HOOP project (2017–2018) and Horizon 2020 ACTIVAGE project (H2020-732679). These projects have been partially funded by the EIT and the European Union.


  1. 1.
    ACTIVAGE project (2017–2020) ACTivating InnoVative IoT smart living environments for AGEing well. Project partially funded by the European Union. H2020 Grant agreement No 732679Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ACTIVAGE project website (2019) Retrieved from Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  3. 3.
    Bajgier SM et al (1991) Introducing students to community operations research by using a city neighborhood as a living laboratory. Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS), Maryland, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bergvall-Kareborn B, Hoist M, Stahlbrost A (2009) Concept design with a living lab approach. In: IEEE 42nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE, Hawaii USA, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chesbrough H et al (2008) Open innovation: researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colomer J et al (2014) Experience in evaluating AAL solutions in living labs. Sensors 14(4):7277–7311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    EIT Health (2019) EIT health website. Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  8. 8.
    ENOLL (2019) European network of living labs. Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  9. 9.
    ENoLL application guidelines (2019) ENoLL website. 13th wave application guidelines. Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  10. 10.
    Ferro E, Girolami M, Salvi D et al (2015) The UniversAAL platform for AAL (Ambient Assisted Living). J Intell Syst 24(3):301–319. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Forum LLSA (2019) Forum des Living Labs en Santé et Autonomie. Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  12. 12.
    Halstad Living Lab (2019) Halstad Living Lab webpage. Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  13. 13.
    HOOP project (2018) mHealth tOol for parkinsOn’s disease training and rehabilitation at Patient’s home. Project funded by the EIT Health, a programme supported by the European Union. Project number 18235Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    imec (2019) Living Lab Innovatrix © imec. Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  15. 15.
    ISO/FDIS 9241-210 (2019) Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: human-centred design for interactive systems (under development in April 2019)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ISO 13407 (1999) ISO 13407 human-centred design processes for interactive systemsGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISO 9241-210 (2010) ISO 9241-210:2010 Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: human-centred design for interactive systemsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Montalva JB, Lazaro JP (2009) CIAmI: an experimental research centre for AmI applications and services. In: Proceedings of the DRT4All 2009, Barcelona, Spain, pp 18–25Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nesti G (2018) Co-production for innovation: the urban living lab experience. Policy Soc 37(3):310–325. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nielsen J (1993) Usability engineering. Academic Press Inc, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Picard R et al (2017) Co-design in living labs for healthcare and independent living: concepts, methods and tools. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smart House Living Lab (2019) Smart house Living Lab (Life supporting technologies—Universidad Politécnica de Madrid). Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  23. 23.
    U.S Congress (1995) Innovation and commercialization of emerging technology. Office of technology assessment. OTA-BP-ITC-165, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. 24. (2019) Accessed 12 Apr 2019
  25. 25.
    Van Geenhuizen M, Holbrook JA, Taheri M et al (2018) Cities and sustainable technology transitions. Leadership, innovation and adoption. Edward Elgar, UKGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Villanueva-Mascato S et al (2018) A mobile system for PD patients based on music therapy. Published in IEEE EMBC 2018 proceedingsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beatriz Merino Barbancho
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ivana Lombroni
    • 1
    • 2
  • Cecilia Vera-Muñoz
    • 1
    • 2
  • María Teresa Arredondo
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Life Supporting TechnologiesUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.E.T.S.I. TelecomunicaciónMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations