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...
Saved in:
Published in: | Sustainability 2022-04, Vol.14 (8), p.4448 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
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 |