Com este Workshop apresenta-se o SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION LIVING LAB, rede que reúne de forma transversal os atores relevantes do sector da construção que irão contribuir para tornar prática comum a construção sustentável, estando o principal enfoque na reabilitação sustentável do meio edificado. Este WORKSHOP é dirigido a todos os decisores que influenciam a qualidade de construção do meio edificado. The SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION LIVING LAB contributes to mainstreaming sustainable construction by creating an inclusive collaboration platform for all the stakeholders and decision makers who influence the quality of the built environment. O Workshop é dirigido a todos os decisores que influenciam a qualidade de construção do meio edificado. A inscrição para o Workshop é gratuita sendo pre-inscrição individual e obrigatoria.

1. 1
Strategic
Project
ALCOTRA
INNOVAZIONE
Lisboa,
22nd
November
2012
Ideal
Living
Labs
and
reality:
the
case
of
Alcotra
Innova=on
project
Paola
Capello,
Regione
Piemonte
(Italy),
project
manager

2. 2
Table
of
contents
Ø Some
background
info
on
the
Alpmed
Region
Ø
LLs
from
ENoLL
Ø The
project
Alcotra
Innovazione
Ø
Areas
of
ac@vi@es
and
responsabili@es
Ø
Project
ac@vi@es
in
short
Ø
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
Living
Labs
Ø
Implementa@on
of
trials
Ø
One
pilot:
G.TES
Ø
Cri@cal
analysis
–
Problems
faced
Ø
Posi@ve
results
Ø
Problems
in
establishing
cross-­‐border
Living
Labs

3. 3
Some
background
info
on
the
Alpmed
region
Ø 142.000
sKm
(Rhone
Alpes;
PACA;
Corse;
Valle
d’Aosta;
Piemonte;
Liguria;
Sardegna)
Ø
19
M
inhabitants
Ø
2
M
enterprises
and
550
B
€
GDP
;
2
%
of
GDP
is
invested
in
R
&
D
WHAT
ABOUT
ALREADY
EXISTING
GROUPS
OF
FIRMS,
ACADEMIA
AND
RESEARCH
CENTRES?
Piemonte
à
since
2009
12
Innova=on
clusters
&
6
Technology
Parks
Liguria
àsince
2011
8
Innova=on
clusters
Valle
d’Aosta
à
since
1993
one
Prototyping
centre
PACA
à
since
2004
11
Poles
de
Compe==vité
and
since
2006
20
PRIDES
(Pôles
Régionaux
d’Innova=on
et
de
Développement
Économique
Solidaire)
+
PACA
Labs
Ini=a=ve
launched
in
November
2008
and
co-­‐funded
by
ERDF
and
regional
funds
especially
focused
on
ICT
(so
far
30
projects
–
6
/
12
month
long)
Rhone
Alpes
à
since
2004
13
Poles
de
Compe==vité

4. 4
Piemonte
LLs
from
ENoLL
-­‐
C.Lab
Salute
Rhone
Alpes
-­‐ C.lab
Agri
(now
-­‐ Design
Crea=ve
City
LL
closed)
-­‐
Innovasud
RALL
-­‐
Living
Piemonte
-­‐
Imaginove’s
LL
(12
Innova=ve
clusters)
-­‐
E-­‐Care
Lab
-­‐
Erasme
about
Aosta
Valley
Region
innova=on
in
PA
Since
2012
-­‐
Vallée
Lab
on
energy
efficiency
and
savings,
logis=cs,
territorial
and
PACA
rural development
-­‐
LL
ICT
Usage
Lab
…
and
some
few
experiences
in
E-­‐
health
/
SOMETHING
NEEDED
TO
BE
DONE
à
telemedicine
ALCOTRA
INNOVATION
PROJECT

5. 5
The
project
September
2010
–
October
2013
Alcotra
2007–2013
Programme
European
territorial
co-­‐opera@on
objec@ve
Co-­‐funded
by
the
ERDF
Axe
1
:
Development
and
Innova@on
Measure
1.1
:
Produc@ve
systems
Partners
ü
Regione
Piemonte,
-­‐
Leadpartner
ü
Regione
Valle
d'Aosta
ü
Regione
Liguria
ü Provincia
di
Torino
ü
Région
Provence-­‐Alpes-­‐Côte
d’Azur
ü
Région
Rhône-­‐Alpes
It
is
a
STRATEGIC
PROJECT
à
all
partners
are
Public
Authori@es
and
the
project
must
have
some
impacts
not
only
on
the
economy
but
also
on
policies
boos@ng
innova@on.
In
our
case
we
would
like
to
show
and
convince
policy
makers
that
the
Living
Lab
approach
can
make
the
difference.

6. 6
Areas
of
ac=vi=es
and
responsabili=es
Regione
Piemonte
and
Regione
Liguria
à
Intelligent
Mobility
Regione
Valle
d Aosta
à
Smart
Energies
Région
PACA
à
E-­‐health
/
telemedicine
Région
Rhone
Alpes
à
Crea=ve
Industries
ONE
SINGLE
AIM
The
establishment
of
cross-­‐border
Living
Labs

7. 7
Project
ac=vi=es
in
short
Ac=vity
1
:
Management
Ac=vity
2
(already
finished)
-­‐ Analysis
of
the
state-­‐of
the
art
and
mapping
of
innova=ve
actors.
-­‐ Awareness
raising
of
the
Living
Lab
concept
/
presenta=on
of
the
project
to
a
broad
audience.
Ac=vity
3
(already
finished)
:
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
Living
Labs
-­‐ Defini=on
of
a
common
set
of
tools
to
deploy
cross-­‐border
Living
Labs.
Ac=vity
4
(on
going)
:
implementa=on
of
experimenta=ons
-­‐ Project
wri=ng
à
evalua=on
à
support
to
the
implementa=on
of
the
best
proposals
-­‐ Launch
of
a
pre-­‐commercial
public
procurement
call
on
Intelligent
Mobility
and
Smart
Energies
as
an
instrument
to
foster
research
and
innova=on
while
applying
the
Living
Lab
approach.
-­‐ Search
for
possible
funding
schemes
for
the
ideas
worked
out
Ac=vity
5
(just
started)
:
Strategic
Plan
-­‐ Wri=ng
of
a
Strategic
plan
for
boos=ng
innova=on
for
policy
makers
Ac=vity
6
(on
going)
:
Communica=on

8. 8
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
LL
-­‐ Theorical
studies
on
possible
governance
models
I. Federa=on
approach
(Source:
Roberto
Santoro)
implies
the
existence
of
several,
independent,
thema=c
Living
Labs
that
are
spontaneously
growing
up
inside
each
par=cipant
country
border,
and
are
then
brought
to
unity
by
means
of
the
crea=on
of
cross-­‐country
links,
clusters
and
mul=-­‐loca=on
experiments.

9. 9
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
LL
-­‐ Theorical
studies
on
possible
governance
models
II. Umbrella
approach
(Source
Jens
Schumacher)
implies
the
presence
of
a
central
(“light”)
management
en=ty
that
is
in
charge
of
facilita=ng
the
deployment
of
trials
inside
a
transna=onal
environment.
It
is
based
on
an
overarching
structure,
composed
by
representa=ves
of
all
the
regional
“chapters”
of
the
cross-­‐border
Living
Lab,
in
charge
of
defining
common
guidelines,
assessment
tools
and
monitoring
systems:
these
assets
are
delivered
to
the
local
stakeholders,
who
will
be
les
free
to
set
up
one
or
more
pilot
ac=ons
in
their
respec=ve
region,
on
a
range
of
thema=c
domains,
yet
according
to
a
common
methodological
approach.

10. 10
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
LL
-­‐ Theorical
studies
on
possible
governance
models
III. LEADERS
approach
(Source
Francesco
Molinari)
as
opera=onal
procedure
for
Living
Lab
establishment
derived
from
the
Umbrella
approach
In
which
following
following
steps
are
foreseen:
1. Localise
and
iden=fy
your
stakeholders
2. Establish
a
Living
Lab
PPP
(Public
Private
Partnership)
3. Assess
the
relevance
of
«
cross
border
»
issues
4. Deploy
an
ICT
infrastructure
5. Establish
a
local
and/or
«
cross
border
»
PPPP
community
(PPP+People)
6. Run
one
or
more
User
Driven,
Open
Innova=on
pilots
7. Summarise
and
evaluate
the
results
The
ideal
world…

11. 11
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
LL
-­‐ Evalua=on
Its
basic
targets
should
be:
1. Complementariness
of
the
consor=um
2. Community
building
and
proper
func=oning
3. User
driven,
Open
innova=on
methodology
implementa=on
4. Pilot
outputs
(and
outcomes)
5. Stakeholder
sa=sfac=on
WATCH
OUT:
6. Cost
/
Benefit
analysis
-­‐ every
Living
Lab
has
to
take
its
local
7. Reuse
/
Transferability
poten=al
context
into
account
and
thus
no
two
Living
Labs
are
the
same
8. Self-­‐sustainability
-­‐
every
Living
Lab
has
its
par@cular
9. Policy
Impact
of
trials
sebng
Par=cular
care
should
be
taken
of:
The
added
value
of
the
«
cross
border
»
aspects
It
is
very
hard
to
evaluate
and
compare
Living
Labs
though…

12. 12
Set-­‐up
of
cross-­‐border
LL
As
part
of
the
Corelabs
project
(hvp://www.ami-­‐communi=es.eu/wiki/CORELABS)
a
framework
was
developed
to
assess
the
performance
of
Living
Labs
according
to
their
relevant
dimensions
and
characteris=cs.
Seven
categories
for
analysis
and
evalua=on
of
the
Living
Labs
were
iden=fied.
Later
on
an
addi=onal
indicator
was
added
to
iden=fy
the
contribu=on
of
living
labs
to
SME-­‐
Innova=on.
The
categories
are
quoted
hereaser:
1. User
Involvement
2. Service
crea=on
such
as:
a.
technical
services
–
communica=on,
collabora=on,
demonstra=on,
prototyping,
valida=on,
product
deployment
etc
b. customer
services
–
innova=on,
idea
genera=on,
community
services,
training,
specific
service
needs,
business
support,
market
customiza=on
c. intra-­‐network
services
(within
ENoLL)
–
governance,
management
and
training
3. Infrastructure
4. Organisa=on
and
Governance
5. Innova=on
outcomes.
One
of
the
major
factors
is
the
involvement
of
qualified
personnel
to
guide
and
assist
the
innova=on
process.
Addi=onally,
the
Living
Lab
should
be
able
to
involve
all
necessary
stakeholders
in
the
innova=on
chain,
specifically
in
the
area
of
user
centricity
and
user
knowledge.
6. Methods
and
Tools.
We
should
focus
on
standardiza=on
and
interoperability
not
reinven=ng
the
wheel
7. Support
to
SMEs

13. 13
Implementa=on
of
trials
1. Accompanying
measures:
organiza=on
of
focus
groups,
encounter
with
local
and
cross-­‐border
stakeholders,
legal
assistance
on
how
to
deal
with
IPR
and
maybe
give
a
legal
en=ty
to
the
Living
Lab,
defini=on
of
a
business
model,
interna=onal
promo=on
of
the
solu=on
envisaged
and
co-­‐
created
with
end-­‐users.
2. Pre-­‐commercial
public
procurement
(only
in
Valle
d’Aosta
Valley)
where
the
budget
of
the
project
only
funded
the
Living
Lab
crea=on.
On
the
one
hand,
the
innova=ve
enterprises
are
allowed
to
exploit
commercially
their
own
prototypes
in
a
faster,
more
effec=ve
and
less
risky
way,
on
the
other
hand
the
innova=on
becomes
more
inclusive,
tailor-­‐made
and
socially
sustainable
through
the
involvement
of
users
and
customers
in
the
process.
Contacts:
Fabrizio
Clerment
f.clerment@vda.it
and
Francesco
Fionda
f.fionda@vda.it

14. 14
One
pilot:
G.TES
Ground
Thermal
Energy
Storage
Main
aims:
Use
of
renewable
energy
resources
to
capture
thermal
energy
from
solar
collectors
and
seasonal
geothermal
storage
thought
closed
loop
borehole
heat
exchangers
in
the
ground
in
southern
Europe
climate.
Key
ac=vi=es:
1) proposi=on
of
new
and
eco-­‐friendly
techniques
of
energy
storage
(chilling
and
hea=ng)
for
civil
and
agricultural
use,
2) integra=on
with
already
exis=ng
hea=ng
and
chilling
systems,
3) quan=fica=on
of
system
efficiency
in
term
of
CO2
reduc=on
and
energy
saving,
4) es=ma=on
of
pay
back
=me
at
present
and
future
fuels
costs.
Expected
results:
• introduc=on
of
innova=ve
techniques
in
southern
Europe,
• relevant
energy
saving,
• reduc=on
of
produc=on
costs,
• Zero
CO2
Contacts:
Prof.
Giuseppe
Mandrone
giuseppe.mandrone@unito.it
References:
hvp://www.dlsc.ca/

15. 15
One
pilot:
G.TES
Ground
Thermal
Energy
Storage

16. 16
Cri=cal
analysis
-­‐
Problems
faced
(1/2)
Ac=vity
1:
management
Project
managers
are,
in
most
cases,
not
public
servants
nor
policy
makers
à
it
is
hard
for
them
to
have
a
say
in
the
world
of
poli=cs
and
,
generaly
speaking,
to
make
any
relevant
decision
on
their
own.
Ac=vity
2:
Mapping
and
gezng
the
right
people
involved
-­‐
We
did
not
spend
enough
=me
on
the
analysis
of
the
state-­‐of
the
art
and
the
iden=fica=on
of
innova=ve
actors
à
sectors
of
interest
were
not
chosen
through
a
bovom-­‐up
approach
but
vicerversa.
-­‐
We
found
it
hard
to
involve
local
stakeholders
(especially
labs
and
SMEs)
because
in
our
regions
(but
PACA)
the
LL
concept
was
not
known
and,
due
to
programme
and
budget
constraints,
the
consor=um
could
not
offer
immediate
tangible
and
concrete
financial
support
to
any
en=ty
joining
the
Alcotra
Innovazione
community.
What
for?
I
do
not
see
any
advantages
for
me
in
a
short
term!

17. 17
Cri=cal
analysis
-­‐
Problems
faced
(2/2)
Ac=vity
3
:
Set-­‐up
of
the
pilot
ac=ons
It
was
hard
to
define
a
common
set
of
tools
to
deploy
cross-­‐border
Living
Labs
because:
ü
partner
regions
had
different
past
experiences
or
none
at
all!
à
While
PACA
wanted
to
build
up
on
some
past
projects
and
ini=a=ves,
the
other
partners
had
to
start
almost
from
Zero
ü
the
project
groupeware
did
not
work
as
expected
à
the
poten=al
future
LL
lacked
on
an
ICT
pla|orm
à
cross-­‐border
working
groups
preferred
to
communicate
via
emails
or
phone/skype
calls
Ac=vity
4
:
Implementa=on
of
pilot
ac=vi=es
-­‐
Partners
are
not
aligned
and
are
not
on
the
same
page
as
per
the
way
of
proceeding
-­‐
They
offer
more
services
/
accompanying
measures
to
local
stakeholders
only
à
how
can
a
real
cross-­‐border
LL
be
established?
This
maver
should
have
been
solved
while
applying
for
the
call
and
not
when
the
project
is
already
on
going…
-­‐
End
2012
/
2013
is
a
“poor”
period
to
find
some
external
sources
of
funding
Ac=vity
5
:
Strategic
Plan
for
boos=ng
Innova=on
-­‐ Very
scarse
and
limited
interest
expressed
by
policy
makers.
-­‐
Euroregion
is
merely
a
label
with
poor
concrete
and
tangible
results
on
a
poli=cal
level.

18. 18
Posi=ve
results
Ø
Regione
Valle
d Aosta
pre-­‐commercial
public
procurement
was
an
effec=ve
tool
to
finance
innova=ve
firms
and
research
centres
though
the
cross-­‐regionality
criterion
was
not
taken
too
much
in
considera=on
Ø
This
template
is
an
important
example
which
can
be
adapted
and
re-­‐use
by
project
partners
within
Alcotra
Innova=on
project
or
even
beyond
Ø
LLs
are
not
considered
only
for
aliens
any
more!!!
Ø
Thank
to
the
networking
ac=vi=es
organised
within
the
Alcotra
Innova=on
project
new
encounters
were
made
laying
the
basis
for
future
coopera=ons.
WE
HAVE
JUST
STARTED
AND
MUST
CONSOLIDATE
ON
WHAT
BUILT
SO
FAR!
NOW
IN
FEW
YEARS

19. 19
Stakeholders
say…
Why
is
it
so
difficult?
Ø
Lack
of
knowledge
and
informa@on
on
Living
Labs
Ø
LL
sustainability.
No
specific
funds
available
(but
in
PACA).
In
the
past
ICT
policy
support programme
of
the
Compe@@veness
and
Innova@on
Programme
(CIP)
and
the
ICT
programme
of
the
Seventh
Framework
Programme
(FP7)
Ø IPR
management.
Especially
big
enterprises
are
afraid
to
share
their
know-­‐how
Ø Different
regulatory
framework
condi@ons

20. 20
QUESTIONS?
Paola Capello
alcotra.innovazione@regione.piemonte.it
www.alcotra-innovazione.eu