Learning in Action: Cross-Learning and Trustmaking in Urban Living Labs

Creating formats that engage both young people and city administrations, connecting artistic activities with planning processes, and identifying points of overlap between youth and municipal interests – these were just some of the learning outcomes tackled in the TRUSTMAKING project. The learning outcomes were rich and far-reaching, extending beyond the immediate project team to all four Urban Living Labs (ULLs) involved. A core pillar of our approach was cross-learning: bringing together diverse actors and leveraging their knowledge, lived experiences, and expertise to foster meaningful exchange and mutual learning.

Designing Effective Cross-Learning Processes

Early on, we focused on how to make cross-learning as fruitful as possible. We worked with a didactic tool, the so-called Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) according to the constructive alignment method by John Biggs. These ILOs were designed to align with project tasks and activities within each ULL, ensuring that participants developed skills, knowledge, and understanding related to co-creation, green infrastructure, and urban transformation. The approach also aimed to engage different cognitive skills, from remembering and understanding to applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

To ensure a structured and iterative learning process, we worked through three key stages:
1. Discussion of learning outcomes and reflection on the first year
2. Formulation of learning outcomes until the next summer/winter school
3. Final reflection on learning outcomes at the last summer school

The first stage took place during a workshop at the Vienna Winter School, following the completion of the co-research phase. With ULLs just starting to build networks of actors, we reflected on our own learning process, expectations towards the ULLs, and limitations of learning outcomes. Key guiding questions for personal lessons learnt included: How did the activities help me grow? What was missing? How could we improve in the future? The discussion also examined lessons learned from the ULL preparation phase.

Lessons ranged from practical insights—setting dates and communicating them to partners early on, ensuring continuous youth involvement is challenging, knowing the importance of being present at a physical place, organizing interactive methods and community-building activities is essential to connect with local youth—to broader reflections on co-creation projects. Some key takeaways included: Never underestimate small scale activities even though they are mostly invisible in overall goals; include more play into all activities; trustmaking does not only include building trust with local youth and professionals but also among the partners.

The second stage aimed at regularly defining intended learning outcomes until the next summer/winter school. Project members refined their ability to formulate effective ILOs across all levels of cognitive skills. A collection of inspiring action verbs facilitated the creation of ILO. The ILO were geared towards different actors of the ULL (personal learning, those of students, city administrations, and others). For example:

By the next summer school, the project team members will be able to…
• implement activities for different audiences that are interesting and attracting
• explain different formats of youth inclusion through co-creation to other stakeholders (private, city administration, youth centres etc.)
• establish methods and tools to support young professionals and local community to work together
• assess which activities are more effective to build relationships between youth and city officials.

For the city administrations, ILOs focussed on applying placemaking with the involvement of the neighbourhood as an important part to create a new urban development area; or integrating the co-ideation and co-creation of urban spaces with young people as an integral part into planning process.

The third and final stage involved a survey to evaluate the ILOs, categorizing them as fulfilled, unfulfilled, or unexpected learning outcomes. Amongst fulfilled learning outcomes on a personal level were, e.g. connecting artistic activities with planning processes, implementing interdisciplinary practices in placemaking, creating a framework for facilitating long term relationships between the school, municipality, and external partners, creating formats which are attractive to both young people and city administration. Unfulfilled learning outcomes were mostly focussed on unsuccessful or discontinuous relationship building with certain groups or institutions, such as a union of youth organizations or certain youth centres. These challenges highlighted an important unexpected lesson: greater agility is needed in shifting partnerships when existing ones prove unworkable.

Image: The collection of the project team’s reflection on learning outcomes (screenshot)

Synthesizing Lessons for Future Urban Living Labs

Reflecting on learning outcomes across the four ULLs provided deeper insights into effective co-creation strategies and common obstacles. More than just a structured evaluation tool, ILOs helped synthesize locally specific guidelines for ULLs working with youth and refine core trustmaking principles.

By embedding structured cross-learning into our co-creation efforts, we not only built more empowering co-creation activities but also created a replicable framework for future projects. The TRUSTMAKING project demonstrates that meaningful urban transformation is not just about creating physical spaces—it’s about fostering relationships, shared knowledge, and a continuous learning process amongst a variety of local actors in urban transformation, including youth.