After the final review, it is worth reflecting on a number of issues related to the urbanisation of innovation environments which have emerged from projects and discussions in 5 groups.

A core question emerging is the issue of leadership and the changing discipline of urbanism in the light of economic transformations. User-centric innovaton environments – be they biomedical, health or mobile solutions related – have a communality their need for successful leadership structures. Whilst urbanism as a discipline is primarily pre-occupied with the spatial and infrastructural (as well as socio-technical) facilitation of economic and social development and accessibility, it cannot be disassociated from the need of institutional transformation. Unless cities, related agencies, universities and companies acquire the managerial capacity to manage an innovation environment, urban transformation and regeneration will not only be without effect, but will also remain reduced to traditional instruments which add at most limited value to innovation processes.

Such leadership relies on prioritisation and continuity. Prioritisation as to set the sectorial specificities (in this case Biomedical) and giving priority in all decisions to activities conducive to this cluster. In the implementation, continuity in such prioritisation is critical – often this is the point where short-term interests lead to a break with continuity – i.e. when housing developments or generic office types promise quicker response from the market.

This points us to a second issue, the ability of urban development strategies to evolve and absorb change over time. Here, our latest observations in Shanghai as well as Singapore and Barcelona have shown that in all cases governance has (or is) gradually shifting from centralised (public) leadership to inclusive stakeholder models. In our global comparative review of biomedical centres, we have identified 4 primary governance models – with differing degrees of ability to evolve strategy. Such transformation is now underway at Singapore’s One North – working towards a model that is more closely resembling that of the Orestad Group (Copenhagen) or the Life Sciences Cluster ‘Medicon Valley Academy’ (Oresund).

Living Labs form part of these discussions, as their stakeholder, end-user and urban development focus provide an important reference to future management models for urban change. Independent sectorial platforms to brand, strategically manage and vision the cluster are ideally placed to provide continuity (especially independent of election cycles) and dedicated focus to the needs of emerging innovative industries. Where changes happen fast and commitment from a variety of stakeholders is required, non-institutionalised governance models seem to have a leading edge.

Living Labs Cities are non-competing – it is an alliance to build mutual strength and share resources to become competitive leaders. This is further strengthened by the European mClusters Programme, in which Living Labs Catalunya is one of 9 Euro­pean reference regions for excellence in mobile solutions clustering. It is as much a strategy as a branding action.

Historically, Europe’s leading cities and regions have considered themselves as competitors – yet an increase in international benchmarking activities and networking has led to alliances being made such as:

• Baltic Sea Region (New Hanseatic League): Joint Branding and inward investment strategy Cluster strategy, business groups related to clusters

• Baltic Ports Association Competitors team up to form a Branding Alliance for global visibility

• UK – Oresund Life Sciences Alliance Endorsed at highest-political and business levels Vision to create globally leading life science regions

• Oresund Region: Cross-Regional / Nationa collaboration on Innovation, Science, Inward Investment, Infrastructure, Marketing and Education

Living Labs Europe is driven by the recognition that place branding can no longer be seen as a closed system, but that network and co-branding synergies can add substantial value. Living Labs Europe provides this branded international framework which enables the Brand Proposition of individual Living Labs to be more credible:

• Association & Collaboration with Europe’s best

• to partners and markets across Europe

• 100% Compatibility with EU R&D and Information Society policy

• International End-User Communities for User-Centric Innovation

• Urbanisation of innovation activities – Living Labs are city based resources with close end-user linkages