@article {1029,
	title = {Editorial: Innovation in Tourism (November 2016)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {11/2016},
	pages = {3-5},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {action research, boundary objects, co-creation, crowdsourcing, innovation, living labs, smart cities, smart destinations, technology, tourism},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1029},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1029},
	author = {Chris McPhee and David Guimont and Dominic Lapointe}
}
@article {1031,
	title = {Empowering Local Tourism Providers to Innovate through a Living Lab Process: Does Scale Matter?},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {11/2016},
	pages = {18-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {A destination management organization looking to integrate technology into its tourism offering tasked a living lab with engaging tourists and tourism providers in the process. At the end of the two-year initial funding period for an action research project, the process is a success and stakeholders are engaged in the innovation ecosystem. But what is next? By observing participants and gathering feedback from stakeholders through a Policy Delphi panel, the outcomes of the project and the intentions and actions of the tourism providers and other parties were identified. Innovation capacity has increased: spin-offs were created and stakeholders have embraced open and collaborative innovation. Now, stakeholders are determined to make the process sustainable by finding other funding sources. But what should be the level of cooperation and intervention? What level can best foster innovation and knowledge retention? A case study combining a grid of characteristics and levels of analysis for living labs was used to identify one key question: for a living lab in tourism, does scale matter? This article will explore that question and will contribute to the understanding of the living lab as a model of socio-territorial action.},
	keywords = {action research, destination management, innovation, level, living labs, scale, socio-territorial action, territoriality, tourism},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1031},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1031},
	author = {David Guimont and Dominic Lapointe}
}
