Loading…

The spatial development of peripheralisation: The case of smart city projects in Romania

This article addresses the uneven territorial growth of the smart city phenomenon and how the national and local spatial politics of urban smart projects work out in practice. While in previous decades the concept of smart city referred mainly to the digital and technological realm as an indicator o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Area (London 1969) 2024-03, Vol.56 (1), p.n/a
Main Authors: Dragan, Alexandru, Creţan, Remus, Bulzan, Raluca Denisa
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-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 1
container_start_page
container_title Area (London 1969)
container_volume 56
creator Dragan, Alexandru
Creţan, Remus
Bulzan, Raluca Denisa
description This article addresses the uneven territorial growth of the smart city phenomenon and how the national and local spatial politics of urban smart projects work out in practice. While in previous decades the concept of smart city referred mainly to the digital and technological realm as an indicator of the performance of cities, today it is taking on a broader range of meanings, so as to also cover such areas as governance, environment, housing and people. However, the critical literature on smart cities highlights two potential disadvantages: firstly, that urban planners who decide to pursue a smart city vision run the risk of creating a kind of power and control over residents; and secondly that there appears to be an incompatibility between smart cities and the informal. Moreover, the spatial and the critical dimensions of the governance of urban smart projects are still insufficiently researched. By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timisoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities. Short By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timişoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/area.12902
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2924904913</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2924904913</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRsFYv_oIFb0LqfiW7662U-gEFoVTwtmySCd2SJnE3VfLv3RjPzmVmmGdmXl6EbilZ0BgP1oNdUKYJO0MzKmSaCJmxczQjhIiEKC0u0VUIh7HNUjJDH7s94NDZ3tkal_AFddsdoelxW-EOvOv24G3tQgTa5hGPdGEDjONwtL7HhesH3Pn2AEUfsGvwtj3axtlrdFHZOsDNX56j96f1bvWSbN6eX1fLTVJwLllCOU8JzdWYbClVxnKdS1VyldlClEpSleaMC8FJJinPtFQ6A5LKWFWgBZ-ju-lu1PB5gtCbQ3vyTXxpmGZCE6Hjjzm6n6jCtyF4qEznXdQ_GErM6JwZnTO_zkWYTvC3q2H4hzTL7Xo57fwA1NRufg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2924904913</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The spatial development of peripheralisation: The case of smart city projects in Romania</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Wiley</source><creator>Dragan, Alexandru ; Creţan, Remus ; Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</creator><creatorcontrib>Dragan, Alexandru ; Creţan, Remus ; Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</creatorcontrib><description>This article addresses the uneven territorial growth of the smart city phenomenon and how the national and local spatial politics of urban smart projects work out in practice. While in previous decades the concept of smart city referred mainly to the digital and technological realm as an indicator of the performance of cities, today it is taking on a broader range of meanings, so as to also cover such areas as governance, environment, housing and people. However, the critical literature on smart cities highlights two potential disadvantages: firstly, that urban planners who decide to pursue a smart city vision run the risk of creating a kind of power and control over residents; and secondly that there appears to be an incompatibility between smart cities and the informal. Moreover, the spatial and the critical dimensions of the governance of urban smart projects are still insufficiently researched. By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timisoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities. Short By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timişoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0004-0894</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-4762</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/area.12902</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Center and periphery ; Cities ; Geography ; Governance ; Housing ; Incompatibility ; peripheralisation ; quantitative methodology ; Romania ; Small cities ; Smart cities ; smart city projects ; Spatial ability ; Spatial analysis ; Spatial distribution ; Timișoara</subject><ispartof>Area (London 1969), 2024-03, Vol.56 (1), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>The information, practices and views in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG). © 2023 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers).</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). 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-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5975-1253 ; 0000-0002-9053-8394 ; 0000-0001-8688-4676</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33223</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dragan, Alexandru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Creţan, Remus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</creatorcontrib><title>The spatial development of peripheralisation: The case of smart city projects in Romania</title><title>Area (London 1969)</title><description>This article addresses the uneven territorial growth of the smart city phenomenon and how the national and local spatial politics of urban smart projects work out in practice. While in previous decades the concept of smart city referred mainly to the digital and technological realm as an indicator of the performance of cities, today it is taking on a broader range of meanings, so as to also cover such areas as governance, environment, housing and people. However, the critical literature on smart cities highlights two potential disadvantages: firstly, that urban planners who decide to pursue a smart city vision run the risk of creating a kind of power and control over residents; and secondly that there appears to be an incompatibility between smart cities and the informal. Moreover, the spatial and the critical dimensions of the governance of urban smart projects are still insufficiently researched. By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timisoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities. Short By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timişoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities.</description><subject>Center and periphery</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>Geography</subject><subject>Governance</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>Incompatibility</subject><subject>peripheralisation</subject><subject>quantitative methodology</subject><subject>Romania</subject><subject>Small cities</subject><subject>Smart cities</subject><subject>smart city projects</subject><subject>Spatial ability</subject><subject>Spatial analysis</subject><subject>Spatial distribution</subject><subject>Timișoara</subject><issn>0004-0894</issn><issn>1475-4762</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRsFYv_oIFb0LqfiW7662U-gEFoVTwtmySCd2SJnE3VfLv3RjPzmVmmGdmXl6EbilZ0BgP1oNdUKYJO0MzKmSaCJmxczQjhIiEKC0u0VUIh7HNUjJDH7s94NDZ3tkal_AFddsdoelxW-EOvOv24G3tQgTa5hGPdGEDjONwtL7HhesH3Pn2AEUfsGvwtj3axtlrdFHZOsDNX56j96f1bvWSbN6eX1fLTVJwLllCOU8JzdWYbClVxnKdS1VyldlClEpSleaMC8FJJinPtFQ6A5LKWFWgBZ-ju-lu1PB5gtCbQ3vyTXxpmGZCE6Hjjzm6n6jCtyF4qEznXdQ_GErM6JwZnTO_zkWYTvC3q2H4hzTL7Xo57fwA1NRufg</recordid><startdate>202403</startdate><enddate>202403</enddate><creator>Dragan, Alexandru</creator><creator>Creţan, Remus</creator><creator>Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>KR7</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5975-1253</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9053-8394</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8688-4676</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202403</creationdate><title>The spatial development of peripheralisation: The case of smart city projects in Romania</title><author>Dragan, Alexandru ; Creţan, Remus ; Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Center and periphery</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>Geography</topic><topic>Governance</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>Incompatibility</topic><topic>peripheralisation</topic><topic>quantitative methodology</topic><topic>Romania</topic><topic>Small cities</topic><topic>Smart cities</topic><topic>smart city projects</topic><topic>Spatial ability</topic><topic>Spatial analysis</topic><topic>Spatial distribution</topic><topic>Timișoara</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dragan, Alexandru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Creţan, Remus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley_OA刊</collection><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Backfiles (Open Access)</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Area (London 1969)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dragan, Alexandru</au><au>Creţan, Remus</au><au>Bulzan, Raluca Denisa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The spatial development of peripheralisation: The case of smart city projects in Romania</atitle><jtitle>Area (London 1969)</jtitle><date>2024-03</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>1</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>0004-0894</issn><eissn>1475-4762</eissn><abstract>This article addresses the uneven territorial growth of the smart city phenomenon and how the national and local spatial politics of urban smart projects work out in practice. While in previous decades the concept of smart city referred mainly to the digital and technological realm as an indicator of the performance of cities, today it is taking on a broader range of meanings, so as to also cover such areas as governance, environment, housing and people. However, the critical literature on smart cities highlights two potential disadvantages: firstly, that urban planners who decide to pursue a smart city vision run the risk of creating a kind of power and control over residents; and secondly that there appears to be an incompatibility between smart cities and the informal. Moreover, the spatial and the critical dimensions of the governance of urban smart projects are still insufficiently researched. By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timisoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities. Short By using a comparative and developmental quantitative methodology for the urban smart projects of Romania and taking the city of Timişoara as a case study, this study highlights the fact that large cities are not always the best represented; our findings show that peripheral small cities and towns may enjoy a more balanced distribution of smart projects. Furthermore, our evaluation of the spatial distribution (centre–periphery) of smart city projects in Timişoara—a European Capital of Culture in 2023—reveals a higher level of investment in smart projects in its urban periphery. By presenting new critical understandings of the spatial interrelationships of smart city development, the study contributes to the geography of smart cities.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/area.12902</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5975-1253</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9053-8394</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8688-4676</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0004-0894
ispartof Area (London 1969), 2024-03, Vol.56 (1), p.n/a
issn 0004-0894
1475-4762
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2924904913
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Wiley
subjects Center and periphery
Cities
Geography
Governance
Housing
Incompatibility
peripheralisation
quantitative methodology
Romania
Small cities
Smart cities
smart city projects
Spatial ability
Spatial analysis
Spatial distribution
Timișoara
title The spatial development of peripheralisation: The case of smart city projects in Romania
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T10%3A39%3A55IST&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=The%20spatial%20development%20of%20peripheralisation:%20The%20case%20of%20smart%20city%20projects%20in%20Romania&rft.jtitle=Area%20(London%201969)&rft.au=Dragan,%20Alexandru&rft.date=2024-03&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=1&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=0004-0894&rft.eissn=1475-4762&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/area.12902&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2924904913%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3372-133501b83350ad7862b9b78d386ac4d87185b2344306713697896e057697fe943%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2924904913&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true