Living labs have emerged as a long-term, collaborative approach to addressing complex societal challenges, such as sustainable land and water management and climate change adaption. While these transdisciplinary environments foster continuous knowledge exchange and interactions among actors from diverse disciplines and sectors, the role of learning in realizing the impacts of living labs on participating actors and broader society is often underexplored. This paper aims to identify and analyze learning that occurs within a sequence of co-creative activities and their resulting outcomes, using the concept of ‘learning pathways’. The ‘living lab learning framework’ provides a systematic approach to organizing and categorizing living lab activities, enabling to infer learning pathways. An ex-post analysis of an empirical case study on a climate adaptation project, KLIMAP, resulted in seven distinct learning pathways: 1) harnessing collective integrated knowledge, 2) building collaborative networks, 3) enhancing stakeholder capacity, 4) adapting and contextualizing knowledge, 5) diffusing knowledge, 6) facilitating co-creation, and 7) reflecting on learning. These pathways were developed by examining the types of learning activities, their processes, and the entities involved, linking them to the outcomes achieved. The findings highlight that learning pathways contribute to identifying outcomes and broader impacts of living labs.

Intreerede prof.dr. J.H. Slinger ’Polyphony in water and coastal policy'
Hoogleraar Transdisciplinary Policy Development Faculteit TBM
Woensdag 28 mei 2025

https://nmclive.tudelft.nl/Mediasite/Play/9d04a683795e4ad1bb562fe2b26ea9241d

ΔENIGMA is a national research infrastructure with various work packages (WP) studying the water and sediment dynamics for nature-based, flexible, and adaptive flood risk management in the Dutch Delta's river-estuary-coast continuum. WP6 joins efforts between TUDelft, Wageningen, Twente, and Deltares Labs to study and facilitate interactions bridging related knowledgecommunication- action gaps. The WP6 designs various tools, such as serious games, using digital and physical interfaces to facilitate collaborations between societal and academic actors while joining efforts within, across, and beyond WPs. Collaborative interactions are considered productive when achieving individual, group, and societal learning about the problem and proposed solutions, the norms and values behind, and the necessary (collective) action f (Barth et al., 2023). This paper presents the TU Delft Game Lab+’s prototype, developed with ΔENIGMA WP2 and TU Delft Serious Game Design students (Kontaxopoulou et al., 2024).

The pressure on land and water systems is one of the major sustainability challenges of modern society. In response, living labs have emerged as a collaborative governance approach that generate innovative solutions for these intricate problems (Bhatta et al., 2024b). Innovation in living labs are facilitated by continuous exchange of knowledge and experiences from diverse disciplines and sectors amongst diverse actors (academia, civil society, government, and private organization) (Bhatta, Vreugdenhil, et al., 2023). Thus, this research seeks to identify learning that occurs during such living lab projects by utilizing ‘learning pathways’. Learning pathways allow navigating and sequencing learning experiences and guide individuals and organizations through acquiring and refining their knowledge and competencies, leading to specific outcomes (Harris et al., 2006; Mphinyane, 2013; Ramsarup, 2017). An ex-post analysis of an empirical case study on a climate adaptation project, named KLIMAP, was conducted, that led to seven learning pathways. These pathways focus on 1) harnessing collective, integrated knowledge, 2) building collaborative networks, 3) enhancing stakeholder capacity, 4) knowledge adaptation and contextualization, 5) knowledge diffusion, 6) co-creation facilitation, and 7) reflection and learning (Bhatta et al., 2024a). Finally, insights regarding activities to strengthen learning pathways and the impacts of future co-creative projects are distilled.

In this paper, we closely examine the case of the Marker Wadden, a nature restoration project with recreational opportunities in the Dutch lake Markermeer. The Marker Wadden – a mud island concept – has been constructed using locally sourced building materials (sediments from the lake) and is designed to withstand natural dynamics such as storms and waves. Lack of funding and financing has been repeatedly discussed and identified as a key barrier to implementing and upscaling ecological restoration, or Nature-based Solutions (NbS) in general. This highlights the importance of studying a unique case, such as the Marker Wadden, where this well-documented barrier has been overcome. We aim to identify the financial arrangements made and how they came about. We adopt the rounds model (a policy analysis theory), apply evidence triangulation, and employ a theoretical framework that captures an institutional perspective on financial barriers. We find the Marker Wadden project to be an example of public and private co-funding for ecosystem restoration. We further find revenue generation from recreational activities leads to partial cost-recovery, and non-public funding sources are unlocked due to the involvement of an NGO. We also find the pre-investment phase to be instrumental in overcoming financial barriers during later (implementation) phases. We surface the main drivers that led to funding for the Marker Wadden project, reveal opportunities for investment planning for NbS, and expose trade-offs in terms of (democratic) equity, efficiency, and environmental outcomes resulting from the combined public, private, and philanthropic co-funding arrangements used.

Coastal erosion threatens flood safety and other uses of beaches and dunes globally. In the Netherlands a coastline maintenance policy was implemented in the 1990's to address the negative effects of erosion, with sand nourishments as the primary means. In this study, the cumulative effects of these nourishments are evaluated against the strategic goal of sustainable preservation of the uses and values of the coast. This research aims to inform national and international policy makers, practitioners, and scientist about the possible long-term effects of coastal management with structural sand nourishments. Coastal indicators were analysed to quantify the morphological evolution of the coast before and since coastline maintenance. It is observed that regular nourishments serve to halt structural coastline retreat. The coastline built out, on average, which was necessary to achieve maintenance of the most erosive areas. Additionally, strong dune growth is observed since the start of coastline maintenance, thanks to wind-driven transport of nourished sand and more dynamic dune management. Nourishments thus contribute positively to flood safety, although flood safety is not an automatic benefit of coastline maintenance. Space for recreation and nature is maintained or improved: the dry beach width was unaffected, and dune areas have grown. Further, it is reported that the impact of nourishments on the coastal ecosystem is local and temporary, leading to the inference that uses and values of the coast are being maintained sustainably through regular nourishments. Overall, the approach of coastline maintenance with regular pro-active nourishments has thus proven to be successful.

Addressing complex societal challenges such as water management and sustainable land use requires evidence-based policymaking supported by interdisciplinary collaboration across science, policy, and society. In this context, living labs are increasingly recognized as valuable platforms for generating evidence by engaging diverse stakeholders and fostering citizen engagement. However, there is a limited understanding of how living labs are positioned with different policy stages, and how they can support policymaking meaningfully. Thus, this study aims to address this gap by investigating how living labs contribute to agenda-setting, formulation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation. Additionally, this study also aims to identify how these labs can be assessed effectively using robust M&E tools to better identify their impacts. The study will analyze five living labs operating in policy contexts, aiming to identify their positioning within policy stages and strategies adopted by them to strengthen their link to policy outcomes.

Complex issues like sustainable land and water management demand a transdisciplinary and collaborative approach, such as that of living labs, bridging between science, policy, and society. Living labs facilitate active collaboration among diverse actors from public and private sectors, research institutes, and civil society, creating an environment that fosters innovations to address environmental challenges. However, the impact of these labs is often assessed based only on their immediate results, overlooking the potential effects of learning during co-creation activities. Thus, this paper develops a framework that allows to capture learning in a living lab co-creative environment. In response to widespread calls for an epistemological basis for living labs, the study bases the framework on relevant learning theories. First, the literature dealing with learning theories relevant to the characteristics of living labs is reviewed. The relevant theories are identified as: behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, experimental, situated, social, organizational, transformative, and connectivism. Next, the insights on learning theories are used in developing a Living Lab Learning Framework with three interacting components: A. Learning types (what), B. Learning process (how), and C. Learning levels (who), contributing to learning outcomes. The framework distinguishes content, capacity, and network as learning types; intentional or incidental as learning processes; and individual, team, and organization as learning levels. Finally, the potential application of the framework during the initiation, implementation, and evaluation project phases of living labs is highlighted. The framework is envisaged to extend the impacts of living labs beyond immediate results by providing a systematic method for assessing learning and its outcomes and generating insights regarding future improvements in the configuration of living lab learning environments.

The Delft Method for System Dynamics (SD) is a proven method for learning basic SD. The method focuses on learning by doing: first you try to work through an exercise, and if you do not understand something, then you can look up the theory. The book contains exercises on topics such as causal loop diagrams, delays, and when SD is an appropriate methodology. It also contains modelling exercises that show students how to build low to medium complexity models, and how to use these models for policy analysis. The theory chapters cover all phases of the modelling cycle: problem articulation, conceptualisation, formulation, evaluation (including validation and scenario analysis), and policy analysis. This book is intended for students and teachers in large or small System Dynamics courses, and for motivated students that want to learn SD at their own pace.

Nature-based living labs combine the elements of nature-based solution design with a living lab context to address social and environmental resilience challenges. There is a need to deepen insights on the characteristics of the emergent phenomenon of nature-based living labs, with respect to their predecessors. Accordingly, the paper first develops an outline of how living labs evolved into nature-based living labs, informed by bibliometric analysis. Second, the unique characteristics of nature-based living labs are identified using a systematic literature review. Finally, the core characteristics of living labs are determined, and nature-based living labs are placed within this context. Initial living labs had a strong technological focus, which proliferated into diverse application domains and regions after the European Network of Living Labs was established and expanded. Urban living labs emerged as a significant multidisciplinary and geographically specific domain, while nature-based living labs are inherently sustainability-oriented and consider ecosystem processes, interactions, and natural materials. Next, the paper identifies nine characteristics of nature-based living labs, five of which are always present, namely: (i) real-life spatial context and multi-scale, (ii) innovation and learning, (iii) user-centric, (iv) multi-actor involvement and (v) sustainability-oriented multiple benefits. Then, the four core characteristics of living labs, the variation within these characteristics, and how these align with the characteristics of nature-based living labs are clarified. Finally, the need for research on living labs across application domains and regions is highlighted, so that the global applicability of these local, user-centric, innovative approaches can be established.

Water renewal and flushing in small, intermittently open or closed estuaries is receiving increasing attention particularly in light of the climate change induced alterations in run-off, wave and sediment transport conditions along coasts. The challenges of predicting the stratification-circulation state and the balance between tidal or freshwater flushing in response to the mouth dynamics of small, wave-dominated estuaries is the focus of the paper. Such predictions are required for determining estuary freshwater requirements or establishing an estuary's capacity to maintain sound water quality under pollutant discharges. Advances in simulating changes in stratification-circulation over long time scales are limited. Instead attention has focused on generating indices of stratification or water quality state using heuristic methods. In this paper, systems dynamics modelling is applied to simulate the non-linear response of the estuary to changes in river and marine water fluxes. The estuary is modelled as a basin with a specified water volume to water level relationship, connected to the sea by a channel with variable sill height, but fixed width. The direction and magnitude of the flow through the mouth determines whether the sill height erodes or accretes and hence the mouth dynamics (see Slinger, 2017). The tidal flux through the mouth co-determines the volumetric exchange of salt, influencing both the stratification state of the estuary and the degree of tidal or freshwater flushing. This is also influenced by run-off. The resulting dynamic balance is captured in two bulk indices, the Estuarine Richardson number and the bulk densimetric Froude number. Using measured data from the Great Brak Estuary, South Africa, the model is calibrated. Model simulations demonstrate the importance of tidal flushing and concomitant mouth breaching for water renewal as freshwater flushing declines under scenarios of increased water abstraction. Although the estuary remains partially mixed, there is increased average salinity and a more uniform the water column. Water releases and mouth breaching bring about a more natural stratification-circulation state, but these effects are short-lived.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published their Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions (NbS) in an effort to further a common understanding and successful application of NbS. Our objective is to analyse the applicability of and considerations and advancements in using the IUCN Standard, as very few studies have examined and reflected on its actual application. As method, we applied the IUCN Standard to three case studies of river restoration projects with a focus on flood risk mitigation: (1) Eddleston Water Project, (2) “Room for the River” Deventer Project, and (3) Missouri River Levee Setback Project. Rather than evaluating the case studies itself, we evaluated the outcome to find the strong and weak points of the IUCN Standard. The gathered data (publicly accessible documents, conducted interviews with experts and stakeholders) was analysed and showed the role of the number of documents and interviews available. This determined the outcome of the IUCN assessment. The consultation of project experts has appeared to be an essential step in the data collection, while stakeholder interviews and field visits were less important, but did increase the degree of substantiation and the ease of data collection, respectively. Although restricted by a limited evaluation of flood risk mitigation studies, using the IUCN Standard for an ex-post assessment can provide credibility to project processes (e.g. stakeholder engagement and adaptive management), reveal project strengths and weaknesses, and provide opportunities for the comparison of projects. Hence, the IUCN Standard aptly evaluates process-based aspects of Nature-based Solutions for riverine flood risk mitigation.

Problems manifested within social-ecological systems (SES) exhibit dynamic complexity and hold implications for current and future human well-being and environmental sustainability. The complexity of these issues, the ever-present uncertainty inherent to SES, and the multi-stakeholder settings in which they are discussed call for participatory modelling to support decision-making on socio-environmental issues. Yet, this challenging endeavour requires a structured approach — a modelling cycle — to facilitate engagement with the implications of participation and uncertainty as focal points for Good Modelling Practice (GMP). Here we propose an integrated policy analysis framework for SES modelling using System Dynamics (SD). This framework stems from integrating two existing modelling cycles that individually consider participation and uncertainty in SD modelling. Three global modelling phases and a set of tools to address the participation and uncertainty features in SES modelling are distinguished. The framework contributes to mainstreaming GMP, offering a structured model-based approach to enhance the robustness and social acceptance of policies on critical socio-environmental issues.

For many years now, various knowledge evidence has indicated that the Dutch land and water systems are reaching their limits. Thus, instead of manipulating the water and subsurface to achieve the desired functions, functions need to follow what the land and water system can offer. Consequently, in 2022, the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water forwarded an innovative and transitional approach of letting water and soil guide the policymaking, namely ‘water and soil guiding’. In this light, this research on progress paper aims to understand the cumulative role that living labs and similar projects existing before the policy guide had in the institutionalization of this policy guide. Further, ‘water and soil guiding’ is just at an initiation stage. This paper further tries to understand in what capacity can living labs support the operationalization, execution, and monitoring of this policy guide. In our preliminary finding, a direct link between the establishment of policy guide and the living labs existing before this establishment has not been formulated yet. However, indirect links such as delivering hard knowledge evidence, and formation and expansion of networks with relevant stakeholders has been recognized as indirect links.

A financing gap is seen as a crucial barrier, hampering the further uptake and upscaling of Nature-based Solutions (NbS). However, it is not always clear what is meant by this, nor is it clear why this barrier exists and persists. The aim of this paper is to generate an enhanced understanding of financial barriers to NbS. This is accomplished through first conceptually and theoretically clarifying the difference between funding and financing and then exploring these through an integrative literature review. We expose three different dimensions of financial barriers in NbS projects, namely the occurrence of multiple types of funding gaps, the occurrence of multiple types of financing gaps, and the particular and complex cost structures of NbS. NbS funding gaps can be broken down into public funding gaps, private funding gaps, and funding gaps specific for lifecycle phases, activities, and cost types. Bridging the funding gap is a necessary (although not sufficient) condition for bridging the finance gap and financing alone cannot solve a funding problem. We further find that these different dimensions of financial barriers can be explained by the misalignment between the characteristics of NbS and the characteristics of our existing institutions. These misalignments occur through different institutional mechanism, including (i) Funders’ preferences, (ii) Revenue generation enablers, (iii) Justification requirements, (iv) Funders’ regimes, (v) Financiers’ preferences and (vi) Finance application processes. All mechanisms influence the occurrence of public and private funding and financing gaps and they influence the cost structure of NbS, in particular transaction costs. The results of this analysis suggest that overcoming NbS funding and financing challenges requires a systemic, multi-level approach as the barriers to project implementation are not all located within a project's sphere of influence or control.

The necessity for evidence-based and socially applicable knowledge in policy processes underscores the importance of the science, policy, and society interface. This interface is increasingly desired to obtain a holistic perspective by integrating sectoral and interdisciplinary knowledge to address complex socio-technical issues (Eberle et al., 2021). Living labs have emerged as promising vehicle fostering collaboration among diverse stakeholders from academia, public and private organizations, and civil society to drive innovative solutions. While living labs provide contextual understanding through real-life experiments and engage diverse stakeholders, they do not inherently enhance policy integration (Willems et al., 2023). To leverage the knowledge and resources from living labs to policymaking, learning from these environments must be scaled up or replicated to tackle similar challenges elsewhere. Consequently, living labs must showcase their impact through tangible results (innovations), enhance stakeholder capacities, and facilitate iterative learning for continual improvement. While there have been some efforts in scaling up and iterating outcomes as well as improving the impacts, understanding the occurrence of learning within living labs is often overlooked.

Thus, in this study, we analyse the learning dynamics in living labs, recognizing that attention to learning within co-creative environments can help realize the desired outcomes and impacts by exploring what is being learned, who is learning, and how learning occurs (Bhatta et al., 2023). To this end, we first developed a learning framework for living labs, identifying (i) types of learning as content-, capacity- and networking-related, (ii) levels of learning as individual-, group- and organization/societal-level, and (iii) processes of learning as intentional and incidental. Subsequently, we applied this framework to the KLIMAP project, which aimed to develop climate adaptive water and soil management pathways in Dutch sandy soil region. Our analysis uncovered several evidence of various learning types, levels and processes linked to the project’s outcomes. An indirect yet significant policy outcome of KLIMAP is the attention to water and soil management in Dutch policymaking through the water-bodem sturend framework. This outcome is attributed to years of research and numerous climate adaptation, land, and water management projects, including KLIMAP. Additionally, we formulated recommendations to enhance the impacts of the living labs as, ensuring inclusion of all relevant stakeholders, emphasizing effective communication among project stakeholders and with the wider public, providing accessible content through diverse mediums like audio-video, flyer and text, and acknowledging the time and labour-intensive nature of these interactions.

Ports are increasingly ‘greening’ operations to protect their ‘license to operate’ by integrating social-environmental considerations into their management and reporting on their sustainability performance. In this research, we develop a novel method for port sustainability performance (PSP) assessment that combines science-based knowledge with place-based contextualisation. Specifically, we address a recognised challenge of combining global (‘top-down’) techno-scientifically oriented indicators with place-based locally relatable (‘bottom-up’) contexts in sustainability performance, in addition to addressing limitations encountered in empirical verification. First, a critical evaluation of the international literature on port sustainability assessments is undertaken to distil commonalities in global performance indicators, and to identify typical frames used in the design of sustainability performance indices. We apply this learning, together with place-based experiential knowledge, to develop a science-based framework for a Port Sustainability Performance (PSP) Index that is explicitly aligned with the Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs). We then apply a co-design process to demonstrate local customisation of the index to derive place-based quantifiable measures and targets. Further, for easy-to-use empirical verification, a simple spreadsheet is applied to develop a flexible weighted scoring matrix. The matrix uses place-based rating systems for selected measures and associated targets, and aggregates allocated scores into informative outputs. Finally, the concept of Circles of Sustainability is adapted for ports to visually display sustainability performance, in alignment with related SDGs. This research contributes to bridging the science-practice divide in reporting on port sustainability performance.

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are actions that harness nature to help address major societal challenges. The assessment frameworks for NbS proposed in the literature differ in scope and intended use. In 2020, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) introduced their Global Standard for NbS as a framework that can be used by anyone working on different types of NbS. Since research on the applicability of the IUCN Standard remains limited, the aim of this paper is to analyse whether the IUCN Standard may be used as an overarching assessment framework for NbS in river flood management applications and to identify the main differences in content with other NbS-frameworks. This was achieved through a comparison with 29 assessment frameworks for NbS, that are applicable to physical interventions for riverine flood risk reduction. The comparisons showed that the IUCN Standard has the largest breadth in scope of application and may therefore be used as an overarching framework. In addition, we identified a distinction between frameworks for the assessment of project processes (process-oriented) and project results (results-oriented), where the IUCN Standard can be characterized as process-oriented. This implies that the IUCN Standard may be used to assess the processes (e.g. stakeholder engagement and adaptive management) of planned, ongoing or completed NbS projects for a wide variety of environmental contexts and societal challenges. This will help persuade policy makers to consider NbS as one of the solutions in flood management issues, next to or in combination with e.g. engineering solutions or changing land use. We also identified that, while the IUCN Standard is straightforward to use and incorporates stakeholder input, the environmental context specificity as well as guidance depth on resources for assessment can be improved.

Communal rangelands in South Africa are generally perceived as overgrazed owing to complexities in their histories and collective utilisation which often leads to improper management. A suitable solution has not been found in land management policies because local people’s contexts and their indigenous knowledge are ignored. Hence, this paper is aimed at (i) assessing the role indigenous knowledge can play in communal rangeland management, (ii) exploring working solutions to incorporate indigenous knowledge into effective communal rangeland management and land use policies, (iii) assessing mechanisms for generational transfer of indigenous knowledge. Findings from the Participatory Geographic Information System (PGIS) and Focus Group Discussion, conducted with Cata and Guquka villages in the Eastern Cape province were synthesised. This revealed that communal farmers have in-depth knowledge of their communal land, past and present rangeland management strategies and changes in rangeland condition. However, there is breakdown in the indigenous knowledge system whereby this knowledge is not being transferred and translated into good rangeland management practice, owing to the ageing population of communal farmers, limited youth involvement in livestock farming and limited access to extension services. This suggests a need for new policy approaches that would include participation of local people in policy planning and development.