The Blue-Green Urban Living Labs of Kuala Lumpur

Jamalunlaili Abdullah, Raziah Ahmad, Muhammad Hafiz Zainal


The extraordinary societal challenges demand cities to be innovative and adaptable to the needs of urban citizens. In the Malaysian context, the Blue-Green Infrastructure (BGI) has not been well incorporated into the ULLs. This paper seeks to address this gap by exploring the potential of the Blue-Green Urban Living Labs (BGULLs) at the Sungai Bunus catchment area. Using Google Form, survey questionnaire is conducted among professionals and the public. Findings of this unprecedented study suggest the BGULLs offer beyond beautification works, and it is voicing the virtual idea of the BGULLs into a real setting that re+ects the public-private-citizen partnerships.

Keywords: Urban living labs; Blue-Green Infrastructure; Innovation; societal challenges

eISSN: 2398-4287 © 2020. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license ( Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.


Urban living labs; Blue-Green Infrastructure; Innovation; societal challenges

Full Text:



Andersson, E., et al. (2019). Enabling Green and Blue Infrastructure to Improve Contributions to Human Well-Being and Equity in Urban Systems. BioScience, 69(7), 566-574.

Almirall, E., Lee, M., & Wareham, J. (2012). Mapping living labs in the landscape of innovation methodologies. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9), 12-18.

ASC (2016). Urban living labs. Amsterdam Smart City (ASC): Amsterdam Economic Board, January 14, 2017.

Bacchin, T., et al. (2014). Green-blue multifunctional infrastructure: An urban landscape system design new approach. 13th International Conference on Urban Drainage, Sarawak, Malaysia, 7-12 September 2014.

Baccarne, B., Schuurman, D., Mechant, P., & De Marez, L. (2014). The Role of Urban Living Labs in a Smart City. Proceedings of the XXV ISPIM Innovation Conference, June 8–11, 2014, Dublin, Ireland.

Ballon, P., & Schuurman, D. (2015). Living labs: concepts, tools and cases, 17(4).

Battaglia, A., & Tremblay, D. G. (2011). 22@ and the innovation district in Barcelona and Montreal: A process of clustering development between urban regeneration and economic competitiveness. Urban Studies Research, 1–17.

Bavani, M., (2014). Sungai Bunus suffocates from huge amount of garbage and industrial effluents. TheStar.

Brankaert, R., & den Ouden, E. (2017). The design-driven living lab: A new approach to exploring solutions to complex societal challenges. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(1), 44-51.

Cohen, B., Almirall, E., & Chesbrough, H. (2016). The city as a lab: Open innovation meets the collaborative economy. California Management Review, 59(1), 5-13.

Chronéer, D., et al. (2019). Urban living labs: Towards an integrated understanding of their key components. Technology Innovation Management Review, 9(3), 50-62.

ENoLL. (2006). What is a living lab? European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). Accessed 10th February 2020;

Gofhrani, Z., Sposito, V., & Faggian, R. (2020). Maximising the value of natural capital in a changing climate through the integration of blue-green infrastructure. Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, 8(1), 213-234. Accessed 10th February 2020;

Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Asa, G. (2013). Urban ecosystem services. Global urbanization, biodiversity, and ecosystems: Challenges and opportunities, 175–251.

Grimm, et al. (2016). A broader framing of ecosystem services in cities: Benefits and challenges of built, natural, or hybrid system function. Handbook on Urbanization and Global Environmental Change. Routledge, 203–212.

Haase, D., et al. (2014). A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: concepts, models, and implementation. Ambio, 43, 413–433.

Haase, et al. (2017). Greening cities: To be socially inclusive? About the alleged paradox of society and ecology in cities. Habitat International

, 41–48.

Hansen, R., & Pauleit, S. (2014). From multifunctionality to multiple ecosystem services? A conceptual framework for multifunctionality in green infrastructure planning. Urban Areas, Ambio, 43(4), 516-529.

Ismail, M.S.N., et al. (2019). The characteristics of road inundation during flooding events in peninsular Malaysia. International Journal of GEOMATE, 16(54), 129 -133.

Juujärvi, S., & Pesso, K. (2013). Actor roles in an urban living lab: what can we learn from Suurpelto, Finland?. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3(11), 22-27.

Kabisch, et al. (2017). Nature-based solutions for societal goals under climate change in urban areas: Synthesis and ways forward. Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas, 323–336.

Kambites, C., & Owen, S. (2006). Renewed prospects for green infrastructure planning in the UK. Planning Practice and Research, 21(4), 483-496.

Liao, K.H. (2019). The socio‑ecological practice of building blue‑green infrastructure in high‑density cities: What does the ABC Waters Program in Singapore tell us? Socio-Ecological Practice Research.

Mascha, M., Voytenko, P.Y., & McCormick, K. (2018). Urban living labs and the role of users in co-creation. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives on Science and Society, 27(1), 68-77.

Markard, J., Raven, R., & Truffer, B. (2012). Sustainability transitions: An emerging field. Research Policy, 41(6), 955-967.

McCormick, K & Hartmann, C. (2018). Governance Urban Sustainability Transitions (GUST). Accessed 10th February 2020;

Meerow. S & Newell, J.P. (2017). Spatial planning for multifunctional green infrastructure: Growing resilience in Detroit. Landscape and Urban Planning, 159: 62–75.

Nesti, G. (2018). Co-production for innovation: the urban living lab experience. Policy and Society, 37(3), 310-325.

OECD. (2015). System innovation: Synthesis report, 101. Accessed 10th February 2020;

Omar, W. et. al. (2018). Greening campus experience: moving towards living laboratory action plan. E3S Web of Conferences, 48.

Pauleit, S., Liu, L., Ahern, J., & Kazmierczak, A. (2001). Multifunctional green infrastructure planning to promote ecological services in the city. Handbook of Urban Ecology, 272-285.

Rizzo, A. (2019). Megaprojects and the limits of ‘green resilience’ in the global south: Two cases from Malaysia and Qatar. Special issue introduction: Environmental governance for urban resilience in the Asia-Pacific, 1-16. DOI: 10.1177/0042098018812009.

Schot, J., Steinmueller, W.E. (2016). Framing innovation policy for transformative change: innovation policy 3.0. Draft paper SPRU.

Sek-Khuen, T.T. (2017). The Application of Social Innovation in Designing an Aged Care Centre in Malaysia. World Sustainable Built Environment Conference 2017 Hong Kong, Track 10: Place-making & Community Empowerment, 2498-2504.

Steen, K., & Bueren, E. (2017). The defining characteristics of urban living labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(7): 21–33.

Steen, K., & van Bueren, E. (2017). Urban living labs. a living lab way of working. Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions.

Scholl, C., & Kemp, R. (2016). City labs as vehicles for innovation in urban planning processes. Urban Planning, 1(4): 89–102.

Schuurman, D., De Marez, L., & Ballon, P. (2013). Open innovation processes in living lab innovation systems: insights from the LeYLab. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3(11): 28–36.

Schuurman, D. (2015). Bridging the gap between open and user innovation? Exploring the value of living labs as a means to structure user contribution and manage distributed innovation. Doctoral Dissertation, Ghent University, Vancouver.

Scozzi, B., Bellantuono, N., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2017). Managing open innovation in urban labs. Group Decision and Negotiation, 26(5), 857-874.

Van Den Bergh, J. C. J. M., Truffer, B., & Kallis, G. (2011). Environmental innovation and societal transitions: Introduction and overview. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 1–23. doi:10.1016/j.eist.2011.04.010.

Veeckman, C., & Van der Graaf, S. (2015). The city as living laboratory: Empowering citizens with the citadel toolkit. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(3): 6–17.

Von Wirth, T., et al. (2019). Impacts of urban living labs on sustainability transitions: mechanisms and strategies for systemic change through experimentation. European Planning Studies, 27:2, 229-257.

Zen, I.S. (2017a). Exploring living learning laboratory: An approach to strengthen campus sustainability initiatives by using sustainability science approach. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 1(6)1-15.

Zen, I.S. (2017b.) University campus as a living lab to combat climate change challenge. Rising to the Challenge Malaysia Contribution to the SDGs, 171-175.

Zen, I.S., et. al. (2019). University living learning labs: an integrative and transformative approach. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, 14(4), 139-155.

Zen. I.S., et al. (2016). Reframing living labs in the context of higher education institution in malaysia: an integrative and transformative approach. International Conference on Sustainable Development and Livelihoods (ICSDL 2016).

Zen, I.S., Subramaniam, D., Sulaiman, H., Saleh, A.L, Omar, W & Salim, M.R. (2016). Institutionalize waste minimization governance towards campus sustainability: a case study of green office initiatives in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 1407-1422.



  • There are currently no refbacks.