How Do Ports Organise Innovation? Linking Port Governance, Ownership, and Living Labs

TL;DR

The paper addresses how port governance and ownership shape Living Lab (LL) practices in decarbonisation and resilience by developing a governance–LL fit framework that connects LL pillars to four governance dimensions. It applies the framework to two contrasting ports, Aalborg (Landlord) and Trelleborg (Tool/Public Service), to reveal how contract-based landing zones enable or constrain institutional embedding of LL outputs. The main contribution is demonstrating that macro- and meso-level decision rights and codification instruments determine whether LL experiments become durable rules and scalable practices, not merely co-creative activities. The findings offer practical guidance for designing LLs in infrastructure contexts to improve adoption, diffusion, and cross-portfolio coordination across multi-actor ecosystems.

Abstract

Ports are pivotal to decarbonisation and resilience, yet port studies rarely examine how ownership and decision rights shape the process and outcomes of sustainability and digital pilots. Living Lab (LL) scholarship offers strong concepts, but limited sector-grounded explanation of LL-governance fit in ports. We develop and apply a governance-LL fit framework linking port governance and ownership to four LL pillars: co-creation, real-life setting, iterative learning, and institutional embedding (multi-level decision-making). We apply the framework in a comparative case study of two analytically contrasting ports, anchored in port-defined priorities: an Energy Community pilot in Aalborg and a Green Coordinator function in Trelleborg. Using an LL macro-meso-micro lens, we distinguish the stable constellation of actors and mandates (macro), the governance of specific projects (meso), and the methods used to generate and test solutions (micro). Findings show that Landlord governance offers contract- and procurement-based landing zones (concessions/leases and tender clauses) that can codify LL outputs and support scaling across tenants and infrastructures. Tool/Public Service governance embeds learning mainly through SOPs, procurement specifications, and municipal coordination, enabling internal operational gains but limiting external codification without bespoke agreements. Across both ports, key needs are clear role definition, sustained stakeholder engagement, and timely alignment with decision windows. Overall, LL effectiveness is governance-contingent, reflecting where decision rights sit and which instruments embed learning into routine practice.

Figures (1)

• Figure 1: Organisational scheme of port governance models. Dark green = public; orange = private across infrastructure, equipment/superstructure, and operations. Dashed green box = regulatory/state services (e.g. customs, pilotage, Vessel Traffic Service (VTS)). Banners show contract type: dashed = short-term (Tool), solid = long-term (Landlord).