Barati, M K and Bankaru-Swamy, S (2026) A living lab approach to co-designing climate adaptation strategies. Buildings & Cities, 7(1), pp. 39-57. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Climate change intensifies vulnerabilities in semi-arid regions, underscoring the need for community-driven solutions that strengthen civic resilience. A living lab used a participatory modelling framework to co-design adaptation strategies with farmers in Sadivayal, India. Through mind mapping, sketching and storytelling, local experiential knowledge was translated into modelling parameters and scenario design. Early sowing emerged as the most context-appropriate solution, shaped by the community's socio-environmental constraints and adaptive capacity. Comparative simulations, informed by participants' insights, identified the 38th Standard Meteorological Week (SMW) as the most effective window, reflected in substantially lower water-stress levels and the highest resilience values across future climate scenarios. Strong community ownership was reflected in the 60% adoption of the resilient sowing strategy. The co-design process also supported peer learning and enhanced farmers' adaptive decision-making. Modelling-enabled living labs can bridge scientific tools with experiential knowledge. It provides a policy-relevant pathway for enhancing civic resilience in climate-vulnerable agricultural systems. POLICY RELEVANCE This case study demonstrates the value of living labs as participatory platforms for co-designing climate adaptation strategies in semi-arid agricultural systems. Leveraging experiential learning and participatory modelling, early sowing (the 38th SMW) emerged as a community-driven adaptation strategy. The approach strengthened local ownership, reduced exposure to climate-induced water stress and enhanced resilience across projected climate scenarios. The findings highlight several policy priorities. These include integrating Indigenous knowledge into formal adaptation planning, investing in rainwater-harvesting infrastructure and strengthening institutional support for farmers through capacity-building programmes. Embedding iterative participatory modelling within extension services can further support continuous learning, transparent scenario evaluation and locally grounded crop-calendar decisions. Encouraging participatory approaches in agricultural policy can enhance the scalability, inclusivity and long-term success of adaptation strategies. This study underscores the need for context-specific, collaborative policies that integrate Indigenous knowledge with scientific modelling to enhance civic resilience and facilitate sustainable transitions in climate-vulnerable agroecosystems.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | civic resilience; co-creation; co-design; ecological transition; experiential learning; India; living labs; participatory modelling; transformative adaptation |
| Index terms: | adaptive capacity, adaptation, case study, platform, modelling, co-creation, India, arid regions, ownership, strategy, programme, crop, experiential learning, participatory approach, design process, rainwater, exposure, climate change, mapping, decision-making, climate adaptation, window, strengthening, vulnerability |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, design methods, learning methods, management, public and environmental health, economics, project controls, decision analysis, environmental engineering, user focus, climate science, analytical methods, architectural elements, physical geography and landforms, structural engineering, spatial and geospatial analysis, Geography, urban design, design process, land management, digital design, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Education, Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Organizational Design, Time Control, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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