Living labs: Epistemic modelling, temporariness and land value

Clossick, J and Khonsari, T (2025) Living labs: Epistemic modelling, temporariness and land value. Buildings & Cities, 6(1), pp. 841-861. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

Epistemic modelling is advanced in this paper as a civic design method within community-led living labs. Two long-term projects were examined to demonstrate how temporary architectural artefacts (thresholds, rooms, workshops, urban rooms) can operate as knowledge-producing instruments through which communities contest and reframe land value. Within the context of acute urban land scarcity and ongoing privatisation in London, UK, land access is directly connected to methods of strong community engagement, including embedded presence, co-making, and care-based governance. A collaborative autoethnographic process recorded and analysed conversations between the two architect-authors and an interlocutor for recurring themes. The analysis shows how provisional spatial interventions generate situated knowledge, negotiate power, and translate temporariness into pathways towards permanence. Findings highlight: a) the potential of living labs to treat land as a commons rather than a financial asset; b) the role of temporary architectures as epistemic artefacts that surface values, conflicts, and governance arrangements; c) the expansion of the architect's role from designer to host, organiser and carer. A contribution is made to the living labs literature by foregrounding land as a core resource and by offering a transferable framework for practice that connects temporary architecture, epistemic modelling and the revaluation of urban land.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: bottom-up; co-creation; community architecture; facilitation; land use; land value; living labs; London; placemaking; social value; temporary architecture
Index terms: workshop, co-creation, land use, London, presence, designer, commons, artefact, social value, architect, community engagement, land, design method, modelling, privatization, governance
Subjects: construction type, business, design methods, design process, Geography, economic analysis, analytical methods, environmental science, real estate economics, sociology, property law, profession, community and social dimensions
Topics: Urban Studies, Geographical Context, Governance, Construction Technology, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Legal Issues, Sustainability, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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