[1] J. Batalla-Bejerano and Manuel Villa-Arrieta. Energy transition and regulatory sandboxes. Fundación para la Sostenibilidad Energética y Ambiental (Funseam), 2022.
[2] A. Brons, K. van der Gaast, H. Awuh, J. Jansma, C. Segreto and S. Wertheim-Heck. A tale of two labs: Rethinking urban living labs for advancing citizen engagement in food system transformations. Cities. 123(October 2021), pp: 103552, 2022.
[3] E. Brown and D. Piroska. Governing Fintech and Fintech as Governance: The Regulatory Sandbox, Riskwashing, and Disruptive Social Classification. New Political Economy. 27(1), pp: 19-32, 2022.
[4] EU Growth. European Commission. Public procurement (Youtube Channel), 2022.
[5] F. Ehnert. Review of research into urban experimentation in the fields of sustainability transitions and environmental governance. European Planning Studies. 2022, pp: 1-27, 2022.
[6] S. Ettelt, L. Williams and N. Mays. National policy piloting as steering at a distance: The perspective of local implementers. Governance. 35(2), pp: 385-401, 2022.
[7] C. Evans. Community-Level Vulnerabilities and Political Field Experiments. Revue Canadienne de Bioéthique. 5(1), pp: 54-61, 2022.
[8] D. Fernandez-Llorca. JRC Publications Repository – Artificial Intelligence in Autonomous Vehicles: towards trustworthy systems. Science for Policy Brief. JRC128170, 2022.
[9] N. Frahm, T. Doezema and S. Pfotenhauer. Fixing Technology with Society: The Coproduction of Democratic Deficits and Responsible Innovation at the OECD and the European Commission. Science Technology and Human Values. 47(1), pp: 174-216, 2022.
[10] C. Frey, P. Hertweck, L. Richter and O. Warweg. Bauhaus.MobilityLab: A Living Lab for the Development and Evaluation of AI-Assisted Services. Smart Cities. 5(1), pp: 133-145, 2022.
[11] R. Hamon, H. Junklewitz and et al. Artificial Intelligence in Automated Driving: an analysis of safety and cybersecurity challenges. Science for Policy Brief. JRC127189, 2022.
[12] S. Jansma, A. Dijkstra and M. de Jong. Co-creation in support of responsible research and innovation: an analysis of three stakeholder workshops on nanotechnology for health. Journal of Responsible Innovation. 9(1), pp: 28-48, 2022.
[13] P. Kivimaa and K. Rogge. Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland. Research Policy. 51(1), pp: 104412, 2022.
[14] K. Kok, E. de Hoop, F. Sengers, J. Broerse, B. Regeer and A. Loeber. Governing translocal experimentation in multi-sited transition programs: Dynamics and challenges. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. 43(October 2021), pp: 393-407, 2022.
[15] T. Madiega and A. Van De Pol. Artificial intelligence act and regulatory sandboxes. PE 733.544., 2022.
[16] H. Nguyen and P. Marques. The promise of living labs to the Quadruple Helix stakeholders: exploring the sources of (dis)satisfaction. European Planning Studies. 30(6), pp: 1124-1143, 2022.
[17] Ofgem. Regulatory Sandbox Repository, 2022.
[18] V. Peter, P. Markianidou and et al. Study on the costs and benefits of innovation- sensitive legislation. European Commission. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, 2022.
[19] S. Pfotenhauer, B. Laurent, K. Papageorgiou and a. Stilgoe. The politics of scaling. Social Studies of Science. 52(1), pp: 3-34, 2022.
[20] K. Van Assche, R. Beunen, S. Verweij, J. Evans and M. Gruezmacher. Policy Learning and Adaptation in governance; a Co-evolutionary Perspective. Administration & Society. 54(7), pp: 1226-1254, 2022.
[21] B. Zaki, E. Wayenberg and B. George. A Systematic Review of Policy Learning: Tiptoeing through a Conceptual Minefield. Policy Studies Yearbook. 12(1), 2022.
[22] L. van de Fliert. Webinar on Public Procurement of Artificial Intelligence (Ai): Building Trust for Citizens and Business. Streaming Service of the European Commission, 2022.
[23] D. Ahern. Regulatory Lag, Regulatory Friction and Regulatory Transition as FinTech Disenablers: Calibrating an EU Response to the Regulatory Sandbox Phenomenon. European Business Organization Law Review Springer International Publishing, 2021.
[24] M. Alonso Raposo, A. Mourtzouchou, A. Garus, N. Brinkhoff-Button, K. Kert, B. Ciuffo and European Commission. Joint Research Centre. JRC future mobility solutions living lab (FMS-Lab): Conceptual framework, state of play and way forward. JRC Science for Poliicy Report. JRC127272, 2021.
[25] S. Arora, R. Hayton, E. Toller, D. Lee, S. Prawdzik, K. Joly, T. Goodier, A. Canada, M. Naccarato, N. Dang, A. Wheeler, K. Jamieson, P. Makrodimitris, S. Miller, B. Sirko, H. Atallah, A. Richardson, N. Tulk and H. Armstrong. Regulators’ Experimentation Toolkit. Centre for Regulatory Innovation & Nesta, 2021.
[26] D. Bauknecht, D. Feser, M. Führ and K. Bizer. How to design and evaluate a Regulatory Experiment? A guide for Public Administrations. Project “Regulatory experiments for the reflexive and adaptive governance of innovation”. German Federal Ministry for Education and Research. Grant no. 16ITA213, 2021.
[27] L. Bennear and J. Wiener. Institutional Roles and Goals for Retrospective Regulatory Analysis. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis. 12(3), pp: 466-493, 2021.
[28] E. Eneqvist and A. Karvonen. Experimental governance and urban planning futures: Five strategic functions for municipalities in local innovation. Urban Planning. 6(1), pp: 183-194, 2021.
[29] European Commission. ‘Better regulation’ toolbox – November 2021 edition. European Commission, 2021.
[30] European Commission. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Acts. 2021/0106 (cod), 2021.
[31] G20 and OECD. G20 Survey on Agile Approaches to the Regulatory Governance of Innovation: Report for the G20 Digital Economy Task Force. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2021.
[32] L. Gjørtler Elkjær, M. Horst and S. Nyborg. Identities, innovation, and governance: A systematic review of co-creation in wind energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science. 71(May 2020), pp: 101834, 2021.
[33] K. Greve, R. Vita, S. Leminen and M. Westerlund. Living Labs: From Niche to Mainstream Innovation Management. Sustainability. 13(2), pp: 791, 2021.
[34] Joint Research Center. Public Sector Modernisation for EU Recovery and Resilience Context: Emerging Stronger and more Resilient. European Commission, 2021.
[35] W. Kwok. Sandboxing and experimenting digital technologies for sustainable development. Future of the World. Policy Brief. 123, pp: 1-6, 2021.
[36] J. Lewis. The limits of policy labs: characteristics, opportunities and constraints. Policy Design and Practice. 4(2), pp: 242-251, 2021.
[37] H. Macq, C. Parotte and P. Delvenne. Exploring Frictions of Participatory Innovation between Sites and Scales. Science as Culture. 30(2), pp: 161-171, 2021.
[38] K. Mattocks. Policy experimentation and policy learning in Canadian cultural policy. Policy Sciences. 54(4), pp: 891-909, 2021.
[39] M. McKelvey and R. Saemundsson. The grey zones of technological innovation: negative unintended consequences as a counterbalance to novelty. Industry and Innovation. 28(1), pp: 79-101, 2021.
[40] N. Nesterova, E. Uzunova and P. van Egmond. EIT Urban Mobility Knowledge base of innovative solutions in urban mobility and living labs: Final Report. EIT Urban Mobility, pp: 105, 2021.
[41] N. Oliveira and D. Secchi. Theory Building, Case Dependence, and Researchers’ Bounded Rationality: An Illustration From Studies of Innovation Diffusion. Sociological Methods & Research. , pp: 004912412098620, 2021.
[42] S. Philipsen, E. Stamhuis and M. de Jong. Legal enclaves as a test environment for innovative products: Toward legally resilient experimentation policies. Regulation & Governance. 15(4), pp: 1128-1143, 2021.
[43] T. Schittekatte, L. Meeus, T. Jamasb and M. Llorca. Regulatory experimentation in energy: Three pioneer countries and lessons for the green transition. Energy Policy. 156, pp: 112382, 2021.
[44] F. Sengers, B. Turnheim and F. Berkhout. Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space. 39(6), pp: 1148-1171, 2021.
[45] O. Shvetsova and S. Lee. Living Labs in University-Industry Cooperation as a Part of Innovation Ecosystem: Case Study of South Korea. Sustainability. 13(11), pp: 5793, 2021.
[46] D. Soeiro. Smart cities and innovative governance systems: a reflection on urban living labs and action research. Fennia – International Journal of Geography. 199, pp: 104-112, 2021.
[47] L. Soeteman-Hernández, H. Sutcliffe, T. Sluijters, J. van Geuns, C. Noorlander and A. Sips. Modernizing innovation governance to meet policy ambitions through trusted environments. NanoImpact. 21, pp: 100301, 2021.
[48] A. Taeihagh, M. Ramesh and M. Howlett. Assessing the regulatory challenges of emerging disruptive technologies. Regulation & Governance. 15(4), pp: 1009-1019, 2021.
[49] J. Truby, R. Brown, I. Ibrahim and O. Parellada. A Sandbox Approach to Regulating High-Risk Artificial Intelligence Applications. European Journal of Risk Regulation. 13(2), pp: 270-294, 2021.
[50] L. Vaccari, F. Pignatelli, F. Molinari, C. Noordt, L. Tangi and European Commission. Joint Research Centre. AI Watch. Beyond pilots: sustainable implementation of AI in public services EUR 30868 EN (JRC126665). Publications Office of the European Union, 2021.
[51] A. Veseli, S. Moser, K. Kubeczko, V. Madner, A. Wang and K. Wolfsgruber. Practical necessity and legal options for introducing energy regulatory sandboxes in Austria. Utilities Policy. 73(March), pp: 101296, 2021.
[52] A. Wallsten, M. Henriksson and K. Isaksson. The Role of Local Public Authorities in Steering toward Smart and Sustainable Mobility: Findings from the Stockholm Metropolitan Area. Planning Practice and Research. 00(00), pp: 1-15, 2021.
[53] M. Wegner. New Approaches to Regulatory Innovation Emerging During the Crucible of COVID-19: In Responding to a Global Health Crisis, Industry is Discovering New, Efficient Ways of Meeting Objectives. Therapeutic Innovation and Regulatory Science. 55(2), pp: 463-466, 2021.
[54] X. Zhu and H. Zhao. Experimentalist Governance with Interactive Central–Local Relations: Making New Pension Policies in China. Policy Studies Journal. 49(1), pp: 13-36, 2021.
[55] A. Alaassar, A. Mention and T. Aas. Exploring how social interactions influence regulators and innovators: The case of regulatory sandboxes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 160(November 2019), pp: 120257, 2020.
[56] H. Armstrong, I. Bárd and E. Engström. Regulator Approaches to Facilitate, Support and Enable Innovation. BEIS Research Paper Series. 2020/003, pp: 1-66, 2020.
[57] A. Attrey, M. Lesher and C. Lomax. The role of sandboxes in promoting flexibility and innovation in the digital age. Going Digital Toolkit Note. 2, 2020.
[58] D. Bauknecht, D. Heyen, P. Gailhofer and P. Gailhofer. Experimenting with policies: Regulatory Innovation Zones as a tool for sustainability transitions. (October), 2020.
[59] D. Bauknecht, T. Bischoff, K. Bizer, M. Führ, P. Gailhofer, D. Heyen, T. Proeger and K. von der Leyen. Exploring the pathways: Regulatory experiments for sustainable development – an interdisciplinary approach. Journal of Governance and Regulation. 9(3), pp: 49-71, 2020.
[60] L. Berglund-Snodgrass and D. Mukhtar-Landgren. Conceptualizing Testbed Planning: Urban Planning in the Intersection between Experimental and Public Sector Logics. Urban Planning. 5(1), pp: 96-106, 2020.
[61] I. Bruno, G. Lobo, B. Covino, A. Donarelli, V. Marchetti, A. Panni and F. Molinari. Technology readiness revisited: a proposal for extending the scope of impact assessment of European public services. 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV 2020), pp: 369-380, 2020.
[62] F. Cuomo, S. Ravazzi, F. Savini and L. Bertolini. Transformative Urban Living Labs: Towards a Circular Economy in Amsterdam and Turin. Sustainability. 12(18), pp: 7651, 2020.
[63] European Parliament. Digital finance: Pilot regime on distributed ledger technology market infrastructures (DLT). 2020/0267(COD), 2020.
[64] G. Hasselbalch, B. Olsen and P. Tranberg. White Paper on Data Ethics in Public Procurement of AI-based Services and Solutions., 2020.
[65] L. Kimbell and L. Vesnić-Alujević. After the toolkit: anticipatory logics and the future of government. Policy Design and Practice. 3(2), pp: 95-108, 2020.
[66] L. Neudert. Hurdles and Pathways to Regulatory Innovation in Digital Political Campaigning. The Political Quarterly. 91(4), pp: 713-721, 2020.
[67] K. Olejniczak, S. Borkowska-Waszak, A. Domaradzka-Widła and Y. Park. Policy labs: the next frontier of policy design and evaluation?. Policy & Politics. 48(1), pp: 89-110, 2020.
[68] B. Pel, A. Haxeltine, F. Avelino, A. Dumitru, R. Kemp, T. Bauler, I. Kunze, J. Dorland, J. Wittmayer and M. Jørgensen. Towards a theory of transformative social innovation: A relational framework and 12 propositions. Research Policy. 49(8), pp: 104080, 2020.
[69] C. Rosemberg, X. Potau, S. Leistner, F. Dijkstal, A. Vinnik, C. Tiriduzzi, A. Dave and K. Blind. Regulatory Sandboxes and Innovation Testbeds. Inter-American Development Bank, 2020.
[70] H. Thees, H. Pechlaner, N. Olbrich and A. Schuhbert. The living lab as a tool to promote residents’ participation in destination governance. Sustainability (Switzerland). 12(3), 2020.
[71] J. Truby, R. Brown and A. Dahdal. Banking on AI: mandating a proactive approach to AI regulation in the financial sector. Law and Financial Markets Review. 14(2), pp: 110-120, 2020.
[72] World Bank Group. Global Experiences from Regulatory Sandboxes. Finance, Competitiveness & Innovation Global Practice. 8, 2020.
[73] E. van der Waal, A. Das and T. van der Schoor. Participatory experimentation with energy law: Digging in a ‘regulatory sandbox’ for local energy initiatives in the Netherlands. Energies. 13(2), pp: 1-21, 2020.
[74] L. Bennear and J. Wiener. Adaptive Regulation: Instrument Choice for Policy Learning over Time. DRAFT working paper — Revised 12 February 2019, pp: 1-37, 2019.
[75] R. Buckley, D. Arner, R. Veidt and D. Zetzsche. Building FinTech Ecosystems: Regulatory Sandboxes, Innovation Hubs and Beyond. SSRN Electronic Journal. , 2019.
[76] Council of the European Union. Council Conclusions on Regulatory Sandboxes and Sxperimentation Clauses as tools for an innovation-friendly, future-proof and resilient regulatory framework that masters disruptive challenges in the digital age. Official Journal of the European Union. (2020/C 447/01), pp: 1-3, 2019.
[77] F. Engels, A. Wentland and S. Pfotenhauer. Testing future societies? Developing a framework for test beds and living labs as instruments of innovation governance. Research Policy. 48(9), pp: 103826, 2019.
[78] L. Fuenfschilling, N. Frantzeskaki and L. Coenen. Urban experimentation & sustainability transitions. European Planning Studies. 27(2), pp: 219-228, 2019.
[79] A. Martin and G. Balestra. Using Regulatory Sandboxes to Support Responsible Innovation in the Humanitarian Sector. Global Policy. 10(4), pp: 733-736, 2019.
[80] B. McFadgen. Connecting policy change, experimentation, and entrepreneurs: advancing conceptual and empirical insights. Ecology and Society. 24(1), pp: art30, 2019.
[81] D. Parks. Energy efficiency left behind? Policy assemblages in Sweden’s most climate-smart city. European Planning Studies. 27(2), pp: 318-335, 2019.
[82] U. Pesch, W. Spekkink and J. Quist. Local sustainability initiatives: innovation and civic engagement in societal experiments. European Planning Studies. 27(2), pp: 300-317, 2019.
[83] R. Raven, F. Sengers, P. Spaeth, L. Xie, A. Cheshmehzangi and M. de Jong. Urban experimentation and institutional arrangements. European Planning Studies. 27(2), pp: 258-281, 2019.
[84] F. Sengers, A. Wieczorek and R. Raven. Experimenting for sustainability transitions: A systematic literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 145, pp: 153-164, 2019.
[85] C. Dunlop and C. Radaelli. Does Policy Learning Meet the Standards of an Analytical Framework of the Policy Process?. Policy Studies Journal. 46, pp: S48-S68, 2018.
[86] P. Feindt and S. Weiland. Reflexive governance: exploring the concept and assessing its critical potential for sustainable development. Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning. 20(6), pp: 661-674, 2018.
[87] D. Huitema, A. Jordan, S. Munaretto and M. Hildén. Policy experimentation: core concepts, political dynamics, governance and impacts. Policy Sciences. 51(2), pp: 143-159, 2018.
[88] P. Kobos, L. Malczynski, L. Walker, D. Borns and G. Klise. Timing is everything: A technology transition framework for regulatory and market readiness levels. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 137(October 2014), pp: 211-225, 2018.
[89] A. Kronsell and D. Mukhtar-Landgren. Experimental governance: the role of municipalities in urban living labs. European Planning Studies. 26(5), pp: 988-1007, 2018.
[90] A. Kronsell and D. Mukhtar-Landgren. Experimental governance: the role of municipalities in urban living labs. European Planning Studies. 26(5), pp: 988-1007, 2018.
[91] B. McFadgen and D. Huitema. Experimentation at the interface of science and policy: a multi-case analysis of how policy experiments influence political decision-makers. Policy Sciences. 51(2), pp: 161-187, 2018.
[92] M. Menny, Y. Palgan and K. McCormick. Urban Living Labs and the Role of Users in Co-Creation. GAIA – Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society. 27(1), pp: 68-77, 2018.
[93] T. Rayner. Making space for innovation. Hacker Culture and the New Rules of Innovation Routledge, 2018.
[94] R. Soe and W. Drechsler. Agile local governments: Experimentation before implementation. Government Information Quarterly. 35(2), pp: 323-335, 2018.
[95] M. Vazquez and M. Hallack. The role of regulatory learning in energy transition: The case of solar PV in Brazil. Energy Policy. 114(October 2016), pp: 465-481, 2018.
[96] J. Voß and A. Simons. A novel understanding of experimentation in governance: co-producing innovations between “lab” and “field”. Policy Sciences. 51(2), pp: 213-229, 2018.
[97] B. McFadgen and D. Huitema. Are all experiments created equal? A framework for analysis of the learning potential of policy experiments in environmental governance. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 60(10), pp: 1765-1784, 2017.
[98] S. Moyson, P. Scholten and C. Weible. Policy learning and policy change: theorizing their relations from different perspectives. Policy and Society. 36(2), pp: 161-177, 2017.
[99] D. Zetzsche, R. Buckley, D. Arner and J. Barberis. Regulating a Revolution: From Regulatory Sandboxes to Smart Regulation. Journal of Corporate & Financial Law. 23(1), 2017.
[100] C. Ansell and M. Bartenberger. Varieties of experimentalism. Ecological Economics. 130, pp: 64-73, 2016.
[101] S. Nair and M. Howlett. Meaning and power in the design and development of policy experiments. Futures. 76, pp: 67-74, 2016.
[102] UNESCAP. Sensitization Workshop on “Frontier Technology Policy Experimentation and Regulatory Sandboxes for Sustainable Development” (Virtual Meeting), 2015.
[103] J. Wiseman. Regulatory Islands. New York University Law Review. 89(5), pp: 1661-1742, 2014.
[104] T. Heikkila and A. Gerlak. Building a Conceptual Approach to Collective Learning: Lessons for Public Policy Scholars. Policy Studies Journal. 41(3), pp: 484-512, 2013.
[105] European Commission. Better Regulation Guidelines. Commission Staff Working Document. SWD(2021) 305 final, 2011.
[106] C. Radaelli. Measuring policy learning: regulatory impact assessment in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy. 16(8), pp: 1145-1164, 2009.



This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By using the website and agreeing to this policy, you consent to our use of cookies in accordance with the terms of our Privacy Policy.