Loading…

Criteria for Smart City Identification: A Systematic Literature Review

The transition towards greater smartness is an emerging trend in the development of modern cities. This transition manifests itself in the widespread adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs), cloud computing, Internet of Things (IoT), and other technological tools aimed at impro...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Sustainability 2022-04, Vol.14 (8), p.4448
Main Authors: Dashkevych, Oleg, Portnov, Boris A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063
container_end_page
container_issue 8
container_start_page 4448
container_title Sustainability
container_volume 14
creator Dashkevych, Oleg
Portnov, Boris A.
description The transition towards greater smartness is an emerging trend in the development of modern cities. This transition manifests itself in the widespread adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs), cloud computing, Internet of Things (IoT), and other technological tools aimed at improving the level of city smartness. Although numerous studies have focused on the smart city (SC) phenomenon, knowledge about empirical criteria that can be used to define a city as “smart” and to measure the degree of a city’s “smartness” remains limited. The present study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by a systematic literature review of recent studies, in which various empirical criteria are used for SC identification. The study helps to identify a total of 48 SC identification metrics, which are further split into three main categories—smart digital technology, living conditions, and environmental (ecological) sustainability. Among these groups of criteria, the “smart digital technology” group of metrics appears to be the most popular, while criteria pertinent to “ecological sustainability” are applied considerably less often. As the study also reveals, only about half of the criteria used by empirical studies for SC identification actually relate to urban residents’ needs, with the rest being general technological measures. Therefore, for a balanced SC assessment, we suggest a ranking system based on the nine most important metrics, which equally represent all the main aspects of the SC phenomenon while placing an emphasis on the improvement of the quality of life of local residents. The proposed system is applied to several major cities across the globe to demonstrate its use and usefulness.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/su14084448
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2653015186</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2653015186</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNUE1LxDAQDaLgsu7FXxDwJlQz-Whab0txdaEguHouaTqFLG67JqnSf2_LCjqXmYH3wXuEXAO7EyJn92EAyTIpZXZGFpxpSIApdv7vviSrEPZsGiEgh3RBNoV3Eb0ztO093R2Mj7RwcaTbBrvoWmdNdH33QNd0N4aIh-m1tJw5Jg4e6St-Ofy-Ihet-Qi4-t1L8r55fCuek_LlaVusy8RyrmKS8gYyJXMN1kBtlETeKt2wtBY8VVamjdVtnlvZYFajFiJDxEaDqrVCw1KxJDcn3aPvPwcMsdr3g-8my2oSEAwUZDPq9oSyvg_BY1sdvZuijRWwaq6q-qtK_AA2ylqX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2653015186</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Criteria for Smart City Identification: A Systematic Literature Review</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Dashkevych, Oleg ; Portnov, Boris A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Dashkevych, Oleg ; Portnov, Boris A.</creatorcontrib><description>The transition towards greater smartness is an emerging trend in the development of modern cities. This transition manifests itself in the widespread adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs), cloud computing, Internet of Things (IoT), and other technological tools aimed at improving the level of city smartness. Although numerous studies have focused on the smart city (SC) phenomenon, knowledge about empirical criteria that can be used to define a city as “smart” and to measure the degree of a city’s “smartness” remains limited. The present study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by a systematic literature review of recent studies, in which various empirical criteria are used for SC identification. The study helps to identify a total of 48 SC identification metrics, which are further split into three main categories—smart digital technology, living conditions, and environmental (ecological) sustainability. Among these groups of criteria, the “smart digital technology” group of metrics appears to be the most popular, while criteria pertinent to “ecological sustainability” are applied considerably less often. As the study also reveals, only about half of the criteria used by empirical studies for SC identification actually relate to urban residents’ needs, with the rest being general technological measures. Therefore, for a balanced SC assessment, we suggest a ranking system based on the nine most important metrics, which equally represent all the main aspects of the SC phenomenon while placing an emphasis on the improvement of the quality of life of local residents. The proposed system is applied to several major cities across the globe to demonstrate its use and usefulness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2071-1050</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/su14084448</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Big Data ; Citizen participation ; Climate change ; Criteria ; Decision making ; Human capital ; Infrastructure ; Internet of Things ; Literature reviews ; Living conditions ; Megacities ; Quality of life ; Smart cities ; Sustainability ; Sustainable development ; Technology ; Urban areas ; Urbanization</subject><ispartof>Sustainability, 2022-04, Vol.14 (8), p.4448</ispartof><rights>2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1537-0832 ; 0000-0001-6927-485X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2653015186/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2653015186?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,74998</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dashkevych, Oleg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Portnov, Boris A.</creatorcontrib><title>Criteria for Smart City Identification: A Systematic Literature Review</title><title>Sustainability</title><description>The transition towards greater smartness is an emerging trend in the development of modern cities. This transition manifests itself in the widespread adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs), cloud computing, Internet of Things (IoT), and other technological tools aimed at improving the level of city smartness. Although numerous studies have focused on the smart city (SC) phenomenon, knowledge about empirical criteria that can be used to define a city as “smart” and to measure the degree of a city’s “smartness” remains limited. The present study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by a systematic literature review of recent studies, in which various empirical criteria are used for SC identification. The study helps to identify a total of 48 SC identification metrics, which are further split into three main categories—smart digital technology, living conditions, and environmental (ecological) sustainability. Among these groups of criteria, the “smart digital technology” group of metrics appears to be the most popular, while criteria pertinent to “ecological sustainability” are applied considerably less often. As the study also reveals, only about half of the criteria used by empirical studies for SC identification actually relate to urban residents’ needs, with the rest being general technological measures. Therefore, for a balanced SC assessment, we suggest a ranking system based on the nine most important metrics, which equally represent all the main aspects of the SC phenomenon while placing an emphasis on the improvement of the quality of life of local residents. The proposed system is applied to several major cities across the globe to demonstrate its use and usefulness.</description><subject>Big Data</subject><subject>Citizen participation</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Human capital</subject><subject>Infrastructure</subject><subject>Internet of Things</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Living conditions</subject><subject>Megacities</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Smart cities</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Technology</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urbanization</subject><issn>2071-1050</issn><issn>2071-1050</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNpNUE1LxDAQDaLgsu7FXxDwJlQz-Whab0txdaEguHouaTqFLG67JqnSf2_LCjqXmYH3wXuEXAO7EyJn92EAyTIpZXZGFpxpSIApdv7vviSrEPZsGiEgh3RBNoV3Eb0ztO093R2Mj7RwcaTbBrvoWmdNdH33QNd0N4aIh-m1tJw5Jg4e6St-Ofy-Ihet-Qi4-t1L8r55fCuek_LlaVusy8RyrmKS8gYyJXMN1kBtlETeKt2wtBY8VVamjdVtnlvZYFajFiJDxEaDqrVCw1KxJDcn3aPvPwcMsdr3g-8my2oSEAwUZDPq9oSyvg_BY1sdvZuijRWwaq6q-qtK_AA2ylqX</recordid><startdate>20220408</startdate><enddate>20220408</enddate><creator>Dashkevych, Oleg</creator><creator>Portnov, Boris A.</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1537-0832</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6927-485X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220408</creationdate><title>Criteria for Smart City Identification: A Systematic Literature Review</title><author>Dashkevych, Oleg ; Portnov, Boris A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Big Data</topic><topic>Citizen participation</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Human capital</topic><topic>Infrastructure</topic><topic>Internet of Things</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Living conditions</topic><topic>Megacities</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Smart cities</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Technology</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urbanization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dashkevych, Oleg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Portnov, Boris A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dashkevych, Oleg</au><au>Portnov, Boris A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Criteria for Smart City Identification: A Systematic Literature Review</atitle><jtitle>Sustainability</jtitle><date>2022-04-08</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>4448</spage><pages>4448-</pages><issn>2071-1050</issn><eissn>2071-1050</eissn><abstract>The transition towards greater smartness is an emerging trend in the development of modern cities. This transition manifests itself in the widespread adoption of information and communication technologies (ICTs), cloud computing, Internet of Things (IoT), and other technological tools aimed at improving the level of city smartness. Although numerous studies have focused on the smart city (SC) phenomenon, knowledge about empirical criteria that can be used to define a city as “smart” and to measure the degree of a city’s “smartness” remains limited. The present study aims to bridge this knowledge gap by a systematic literature review of recent studies, in which various empirical criteria are used for SC identification. The study helps to identify a total of 48 SC identification metrics, which are further split into three main categories—smart digital technology, living conditions, and environmental (ecological) sustainability. Among these groups of criteria, the “smart digital technology” group of metrics appears to be the most popular, while criteria pertinent to “ecological sustainability” are applied considerably less often. As the study also reveals, only about half of the criteria used by empirical studies for SC identification actually relate to urban residents’ needs, with the rest being general technological measures. Therefore, for a balanced SC assessment, we suggest a ranking system based on the nine most important metrics, which equally represent all the main aspects of the SC phenomenon while placing an emphasis on the improvement of the quality of life of local residents. The proposed system is applied to several major cities across the globe to demonstrate its use and usefulness.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><doi>10.3390/su14084448</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1537-0832</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6927-485X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2071-1050
ispartof Sustainability, 2022-04, Vol.14 (8), p.4448
issn 2071-1050
2071-1050
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2653015186
source Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Big Data
Citizen participation
Climate change
Criteria
Decision making
Human capital
Infrastructure
Internet of Things
Literature reviews
Living conditions
Megacities
Quality of life
Smart cities
Sustainability
Sustainable development
Technology
Urban areas
Urbanization
title Criteria for Smart City Identification: A Systematic Literature Review
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T15%3A09%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Criteria%20for%20Smart%20City%20Identification:%20A%20Systematic%20Literature%20Review&rft.jtitle=Sustainability&rft.au=Dashkevych,%20Oleg&rft.date=2022-04-08&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=4448&rft.pages=4448-&rft.issn=2071-1050&rft.eissn=2071-1050&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/su14084448&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2653015186%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c225t-62d1854971ca1ba54e2f57d06b3265c46dc7f99c4de8be7338eeed715b75ea063%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2653015186&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true