Collaborative design approach to identify research and innovation needs within the European smart building community.

Abstract

Background: Upgrading the level of smartness in buildings can significantly contribute to improve our quality and sustainability of living, through increased energy efficiency, optimised resource management, and improved air quality and comfort. However, the fragmented nature of the sector makes it challenging to identify what is technically, socially and economically achieved today in Europe in terms of building smartness, and what should be developed and financially supported tomorrow to accelerate the roll-out of smart and energy efficient buildings.

Methods: This paper introduces the collaborative process developed to involve a large community of experts in detecting and formalising research and innovation gaps related to smart buildings. This process is composed of four successive steps: 1) a communication phase to invite volunteer experts to join the proposed task forces; 2) The organisation and facilitation of online brainstorming workshops to identify research & innovation (R&I) gaps; 3) the collective drafting of a white paper synthesising the brainstorming outcomes; and 4) an open consultation to collect additional external feedback before finalising the white paper.

Results: The collaborative process developed was tested over 18 months and implemented on 12 different topics relying on 27 brainstorming workshops. Building on the collective knowledge of 135 participants, it enabled identification a significant series of R&I gaps related to smart buildings.

Conclusions: The collective sessions as well as the open consultation phases showed overall some clear convergence on the gaps identified. It can therefore be concluded the outcome of the collaborative process reached a consensus among the targeted innovation community. The feedback collected on the process, shows that the frequency, duration and attendance of the brainstorming workshops proposed were very relevant, while the selection of online participatory tools could still be improved. This process could be replicated in other frameworks where research and innovation gaps are sought for.