Conceptualising Living Labs in Sport for Development

Sport for development (SFD) initiatives have faced numerous criticisms, particularly regarding their focus on individual-level (micro) outcomes and the lack of integration at the community (meso) and structural (macro) levels. In other words, the communities that SFD programs were meant to serve were often not actively included in the design, delivery, and evaluation of these programs.

As a result, there is growing recognition that programs need to engage a wide range of community members and stakeholders through more inclusive, participatory approaches. One such method is known as Living Labs. Formally defined as “open innovation ecosystems in real-life environments using iterative feedback processes throughout a lifecycle approach of an innovation to create sustainable impact,” Living Labs are both physical locations and collaborative approaches where different parties test and implement solutions in real-life settings.

Over the course of three years, through the Sport and Social Cohesion Lab (SSCL) project, partners from across Europe developed and implemented sport-focused Living Labs in five different communities on the continent. Through this process, the partners extensively reached out, collaborated, and co-created with relevant stakeholders to tackle shared goals related to social cohesion in their communities. With the SSCL project, we aimed to promote the Living Lab approach as a potential solution to some of the criticisms directed at the SFD field, particularly regarding its individual-focused outcomes and lack of engagement at institutional and structural levels.

This process generated not only positive outcomes but also faced challenges and setbacks. In a recent concept paper, we present our overall Living Lab framework and reflect on these challenges and successes. The main components of the Living Lab framework are outlined, and practical insights are derived from the project. Additionally, we reflect on the unique and sometimes critical role of sport within the Living Lab context. Through this, we hope to provide practitioners and academics with potential building blocks to implement Living Labs in sport for development contexts more generally.

A key aspect of our article is the recognition of the different settings in which these Living Labs took place and how these settings may impose various conditions, constraints, or opportunities on any given Lab. Despite our efforts to provide conceptual underpinning and guidance, this method is highly context-dependent, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach.