Smart Urban Governance for Sustainable Cities A literature review

Smart urban governance Local governments Citizens’ active contribution Using digital technologies / ICT’s Urban improvement and sustainability The main components of smart urban governance are listed here ….. Citizens: not only consulted but involved in the process (decision-making), / part of the conception, design, steering, and management of services and policy-making (to different degrees…) …We can illustrate these components with a concrete project from the city of Utrecht

Restructuring the Amsterdamsestraatweg A project regarding the spatial restructuring of the Amsterdamstraatweg street and area Many issues, problems and concerns (criminality, unsafe traffic, not enough space for citizens etc.) Urban sustainable development: To make it a more liveable area and more resistant in terms of economic, social and ecological dimensions (safety, more human-oriented, more parking places, more variety of shops etc.) Local government: initiative-taker responsible for spatial planning also targeting a collective, participatory process with residents: Citizen contribution: Providing information on the intentions and plans Ask their opinions on the plans To receive new ideas and suggestions The promise of smart governance/ use of ICT’s: citizen empowerment by available (digital) data better civic-public communication regardless time and space: Advantages of the easier, smoother communication: the insights/knowledge of citizens influence political agenda and public debate and that they have deliberation and impact in collective decision-making for shaping urban development Various views and interests can be integrated that supports more sustainable solutions for urban challenges

A systematic literature review To inventory: what we know about the field (relationship between smart governance and sustainable development and the context) In order to further build on existing knowledge The 3 teams 100 scientific articles examined

Key succesfactors Organizational (willingness, responsiveness, capacity) Citizens (demand, trust, capacity) ICT-use: citizens’ needs and expectations should guide Place-, context-specific aspects Organizational Citizens Demand: Usefulness /relevance for citizens. Maybe digital approach is not always wanted. Shallow networks, superficial activities. Online activities easy to abandon Time Trust Reducing in municipality (budget cuts, irritating citizens who have no positive opinion of the municipality): leading to lack of interest But it can also invoke civic activation: they take initiative as they do not beleive it will be solved by governments Capacity: skills, education, knowledge and interest/motivation. The ‘’usual suspects’’ participate more frequently. Digital divide (pre-existing participation patterns worsen) ICT use: A large variety of tools and channels: crowdsourcing, social media, mobile phones, living labs, evoting, epetition, online communities, geo-visualization Emerging technologies, combined with ‘’Web 2.0’’ applications, display a distinctive characteristic in that they growingly rely on user generated content and are inherently collaborative and community based But guiding principle is still ‘’if you build they will come’’ Context-specific factors: Sense of urgency Problem ownership Complexity of issues Strength of democracy Internet penetration Socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the area

Societal structures and technologies should better match Major findings Technological optimism and potential: new modes of co-production for urban improvement Societal structures and technologies should better match No evidence (yet) of sustainability effect Technological optimism Many expectations on the positive effects of technologies by their increasing possibilities for governance applications : More citizen engagement that would lead to New opportunities for building mutual trust and Shared understanding of urban problems Leading to create more sustainable urban environment Co-production successes builds confidence We indeed discover new forms of citizen engagement and new ways of co-creation between governments and citizens as large variety of tools and channels: crowdsourcing, social media, mobile phones, living labs, evoting, epetition, online communities, geo-visualization Governments do try new incentives and new modes to include people. Many of them have a citizen-centric focus to policy-making, redesigning services. But it is also a struggle: what works well? We indeed see the potential by the practices ….though engagement remains modest in terms of : interaction,representativeness, tool variation/novelty Social pessimism can be revealed as well: Suboptimal use of ICT in citizen-govt. cooperation; egovernance remains on the fringes of govt. Initiatives Smart Cities tendency to use administrative solutions (versus Democratic citizen engagement ); Disconnect between smart tech & participative democracy Information-provision rather than dialogue (one-way communication) Traditional participation is declining and new technologies have not yet lead to its reversal (but to the worsening of pre-existing participating patterns) More creative ways – not old content in new communication channels. Old content is not encouraging. If traditional structures, existing social practices are not altered significantly technology only transfers established practices into cyberspace: Urban sustainability (limited discussion) Not being evaluated that is striking concerning the assumed achievements Literature notifies warning about adverse outcomes: spatial segregation, techno-economic and social polarization, negative ecological and economic outcomes)

Relevance for our research We need a better understanding of the relations between technology and social systems to realize the potential We need to assess smart city projects on sustainable development whether they really have an impact We need to obtain a better knowledge of the socio-spatial context to understand to what extent approaches work somewhere else The findings underline that we need to enhance the urgency of this research area There is a lot of potential and positive expectations. But the Literature is incomplete, knowledge is insufficient. Better research is to see how the potential of smart urban governance can be used.