Urban living labs: Relationality between institutions and local circularity

Adelfio, M and Brandão, E (2025) Urban living labs: Relationality between institutions and local circularity. Buildings & Cities, 6(1), pp. 862-880. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

Mainstream concepts of circularity often overlook local socio-material practices in favour of market-driven, techno-based solutions. This paper argues for a community-based approach to foster a grounded socio-economic transition. It explores the potential of circularity initiatives becoming urban living labs (ULLs) by integrating institutional understandings of circularity with local vocabularies and practices. It aims to disentangle the tensions that such integration might have to overcome and define the (latent) potentials embedded in local practices. The study focuses on Fixoteket Hammarkullen, a collaborative initiative in a late modernist suburb of Gothenburg in Sweden. Using a qualitative methodology combining a historical narrative approach with actor–network theory sensitivity, it traces Fixoteket's evolution from an experimental reuse centre to a municipally managed space. Drawing on interviews, document analysis, site observations and a workshop, the contextual conditions that shaped Fixoteket's development are examined. These shifting relationships, roles and power dynamics have (dis)connected Fixoteket from the local community. Re-anchoring circularity in local vocabularies and networks could (re)activate its potential as a ULL. These understandings about the processes, collaborations and relationships can inform community-rooted social infrastructures and foster more inclusive, context-sensitive urban sustainability transitions.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: circularity; co-creation; community engagement; just transition; social infrastructure; Sweden; trust; urban living labs
Index terms: co-creation, dynamics, workshop, narrative, vocabularies, document analysis, community-based, drawing, evolution, becoming, community engagement, collaboration, methodology, Sweden, integration, interview, circularity
Subjects: community and social dimensions, data science, design process, systems engineering, philosophical process, environmental science, research methods, technical documentation, Geography, knowledge organization and systems, data collection methods, management, organizational analysis, sustainable materials, construction type, communities and social development, qualitative and interpretive research
Topics: Organizational Design, Geographical Context, Information Management, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Construction Technology, Research Practice, Design Practice
Descriptive scope: 5 PCTEA

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