Ricci, D; Leiwakabessy, C; van Wieringen, S; de Koning, P and Konstantinou, T (2025) Co-creating justice in housing energy transitions through energy living labs. Buildings & Cities, 6(1), pp. 747-766. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Justice-oriented, context-sensitive approaches that go beyond technocratic top-down decision-making processes can facilitate and improve the retrofit and energy transition of housing. Urban living labs (ULLs) are emerging as valuable collaborative spaces for learning and co-creating strategies. Although increasingly adopted in urban planning and placemaking, their potential to operationalise procedural justice by facilitating inclusive and accessible processes in energy renovation remains unexplored. Drawing on fieldwork notes and expert interviews, this study examines the initial phases of four Dutch energy living labs (ELLs) implemented in vulnerable neighbourhoods to support housing retrofit and energy transition projects. It analyses how they foster residents’ inclusion and connect institutional agendas with residents’ everyday practices and living environments. The findings reveal how ELLs play a strategic role in enhancing residents’ visibility, creating multistakeholder relational arenas that stimulate interorganisational learning. Researchers in ELLs mediate between theory and situated practices, facilitating energy justice implementation by challenging established professional assumptions. Flexible, locally guided forms of ELLs help address process shortcomings, supporting more socially embedded retrofit and energy transitions, and notably contribute to a) resident engagement and representation, b) technical design and performance and c) collaborative and responsive governance approaches.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | co-creation; energy-efficient renovation; just transition; net zero; procedural justice; retrofit; urban living labs |
| Index terms: | decision-making process, net zero, co-creation, justice, energy renovation, renovation, interview, interorganizational, implementation, housing, governance, drawing, collaborative space, strategy, urban planning |
| Subjects: | legal systems, technical documentation, management, renovation and retrofit, urban planning, design practice, decision analysis, business, design process, construction type, energy systems, contractual arrangements, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Governance, Procurement, Design Practice, Risk Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here