@article {1465,
	title = {Rural Living Labs: Inclusive Digital Transformation in the Countryside},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {59-72},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {59},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Digital transformation (DT) has received increasing attention in recent years. Up until now, most of the current studies focus on digital transformation in advanced and dense societies, especially urban areas and technologies. Hence, the phenomenon of DT is under-researched in the context of rural and sparsely populated contexts. This study aims at exploring how a rural living lab (RLL) can be shaped and how this approach can be designed to support digital transformation processes in rural contexts. In so doing, following a design science research methodology (DSRM) approach, we have made an artefact (that is, RLL framework) that is an "instantiation" that supports user centric digitalization of rural areas. The designed framework is developed based on the key components of "traditional" and "urban" living labs, as well as empirical data which was collected within the context of the DigiBy project. The DigiBy project aims at conducting DT pilots in rural areas to elevate peoples{\textquoteright} understanding of digitalization and the application of digitalization opportunities for service development in rural areas in the north of Sweden. As a result of these studies, five key components that guide the design of digital transformation pilots in rural areas emerged, namely: 1) rural context, 2) digitalization, 3) governance, control, and business mode, 4) methods facilitating DT processes, and 5) quintuple helix actors. We also offer an empirically derived definition of the rural living lab concept, followed by avenues for future research.},
	keywords = {Components, digital transformation, Living lab, Rural living lab, Rural residents, user engagement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1465},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1465},
	author = {Abdolrasoul Habibipour and Johanna Lindberg and Mari Runardotter and Yomn Elmistikawy and Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Diana Chron{\'e}er}
}
@article {1055,
	title = {Reflecting on Actions in Living Lab Research},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {02/2017},
	pages = {27-34},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Living labs deploy contemporary open and user-centred engagement processes in real-world contexts where all relevant stakeholders are involved and engaged with the endeavour to create and experiment with different innovations. The approach is evidently successful and builds on the perspective that people have a democratic right to have influence over changes that might affect them, such as those brought about by an innovation. In this article, we will reflect on and discuss a case in which end users took part in the development of a method that stimulates learning and adoption of digital innovations in their own homes while testing and interacting with it. The results show that, when end users were stimulated to use the implemented innovation through different explicit assignments, they both increased their understanding of the situation as well as changed their behaviour. Living lab processes are complex and dynamic, and we find that it is essential that a living lab have the capability to adjust its roles and actions. We argue that being reflective is beneficial for innovation process managers in living labs because it allows them to adjust processes in response to dynamic circumstances. },
	keywords = {action research, Apollon, context, digital innovations, end users, innovation process, Living lab, research process},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1055},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1055},
	author = {Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Marita Holst}
}
