The purpose of this paper is to analyze the current discourse about "Living Labs" and to identify whether these formats are suitable for higher education institutions. The discourse on Living Labs has advanced immensely within the last years, outside as well as within university settings (Weber 2013). Especially in the economy and within social sciences we have witnessed a so-called “experimental turn” (Schneidewind & Scheck 2013). The concept of experiment differs in natural sciences and social sciences. While “experiment” is understood as a “closed laboratory” analysis in natural sciences, the term “laboratory” has been used by American pragmatist Dewey, too, in his approach of the laboratory school and the open society learning experience. Those two different notions of laboratory lead into the political programmatics and semantics (Weber and Adler in preparation) of innovation platform strategies (Weber 2014c) and living labs, design labs and reality-labs for system innovation. Living Labs here are understood as innovation platforms that involve and engage stakeholders at an early stage of the innovation process (van der Walt/Buitendag 2009). Theoretically, they connect to a knowledge- and science based perspective of sociology. Living Labs here ties in with the demand for “methodological collective experiments” (Nowotny et al. 2004; Weber 2014a,b).

On these platforms students, researchers and external stakeholders have the chance to carry out projects that assist the university on the path towards sustainable development. It is assumed that transition occur on three levels: 1) organizational transitions through political programmes, 2a) organizational changes on structure and processes 2b) transition of social systems through the connection between different stakeholders and 3) transitions on the individual awareness through learning (Scharmer 2007; Scharmer & Käufer 2013; Weber 2014c).

Especially on the third level these platforms seems to provide the opportunity to teach students practical, innovative, analytical and problem-solving skills to succeed in today’s economy. But what can these labs contribute as a teaching approach? Mostly one can find these labs as projects and not as part of the curriculum. A Living Lab is a mainly user driven methodology and focuses on the user as co-creator in real-life settings. Can a university create and facilitate such "real-life" settings or is the format only suitable for projects? How can such an approach connect the development of products, ideas and processes with social innovation and integration, as well as transformation of consciousness? Are universities capable of facilitating action to promote social change by Living Labs?

A lab format, where stakeholders from different fields (local companies, enterprises, social movements, local and regional governments, etc.), together with students and researchers learn and create local engagement and enable reflected, responsible action would open into the debates on “service learning” versus “innovation learning” (Weber 2014d). The paper elaborates the theoretical debates, the goals and desired outcome of lab-formats and take into account the transition debates of higher education within European political contexts.

Dawe, G.; Jucker, R.; Martin, S. (2005): Sustainable Development in Higher Education: Current Practice and Future Developments, A report for The Higher Education Acadamy. York: The Higher Education Acadamy. Hoidn, S.; K. Kärkkäinen (2014): Promoting Skills for Innovation in Higher Education: A Literature Review on the Effectiveness of Problem-based Learning and of Teaching Behaviours. In: OECD Education Working Papers, No. 100: OECD Publishing. Käufer, K.; Scharmer, C.(2000): Universität als Schauplatz für den unternehmenden Menschen. In: Laske, Stephan; Scheytt, Tobias; Meister-Scheytt. Claudia; Scharmer, Claus Otto (Eds.): Universität im 21. Jhdt. Zur Interdependenz von Begriff und Organisation der Wissenschaft. München und Mering: Hamp pp. 109-131. Keller, R.; Truschkat, I.(Eds.) (2012): Methodologie und Praxis der Wissenssoziologischen Diskursanalyse, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. Leal Filho, W. (2011): World Trends in Education for Sustainable Development. Frankfurt: Lang. Nowotny, H.; Scott, P.; Gibbons, M. (2004): Wissenschaft neu denken. Wissen und Öffentlichkeit in einem Zeitalter der Ungewißheit. 1. Aufl. Weilerswist: Velbrück. Plattner, H. (Eds.) (2011): Design thinking: understand – improve – apply. Berlin: Springer. Scharmer, C. O. (2007): Theory U. Leading from the future as it emerges. The social technology of presencing. Cambridge, Mass.: Society for Organizational Learning. Scharmer, C. O; Käufer, K. (2013): Leading from the emerging future. From Ego-System to Eco- System Economies. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Schneidewind, U.; Scheck, H. (2013): Die Stadt als „Reallabor“ für Systeminnovation. In: Rückert- John, J. (Eds.): Soziale Innovation und Nachhaltigkeit. Perspektiven sozialen Wandels. Wiesbaden: VS., pp. 229-248. Sterling, S.; Maxey, L.; Luna H. (2013). The Sustainable University. Progress and Prospects. Routledge. Truschkat I (et. al.) 2011: Theoretisches Sampling in Qualifikationsarbeiten: Die Grounded-Theory-Methodologie zwischen Programmatik und Forschungspraxis in: Mey G.; Mruck Katja (Eds.): Grounded Theory Reader, Wiesbaden: VS., pp.353-381. Weber, Susanne Maria (2014b): Zukunftspfade organisationspädagogischer Forschung und Gestaltung: Stakeholderbasierte Innovations-Strategien zwischen Forschung, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. In: Engel, Nicolas; Sausele-Baier, Ines: Organisation. Ein pädagogischer Grundbegriff. Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag von Michael Göhlich. Waxmann. S. 35-54. Weber, Susanne Maria (2014c): Design (Research) Methodologies and Modes of Becoming. Large Group Interventions as Practice of Relations, Narrations and Aesthetics. In: Buchanan, Rachel (ed.): Special Issue on “Becoming” of the Journal “Creative Methodologies”. Weber, Susanne Maria (2014d): Towards a Research Agenda of Multiperspectivity: Potentials of an integrated Diversity-Innovation- & Development Research in Academic Education and Research. In: Peters, Michael (ed.): Special Issue on: New Political Economy of Education. Journal Knowledge Cultures. New York. Addleton.