Next Article in Journal
Physical Responsibility Versus Financial Responsibility of Producers for E-Wastes
Next Article in Special Issue
Advanced Technologies and Their Use in Smart City Management
Previous Article in Journal
How Vulnerable Are Urban Regeneration Sites to Climate Change in Busan, South Korea?
 
 
Article

Classifying Pathways for Smart City Development: Comparing Design, Governance and Implementation in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi

1
Erasmus School of Law and Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands
2
Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management (TPM), Delft University of Technology, 2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands
3
Institute for Global Public Policy, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(10), 4030; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104030
Received: 28 March 2020 / Revised: 12 May 2020 / Accepted: 12 May 2020 / Published: 14 May 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Governance of Technology in Smart Cities)
The emergence of the Internet of Things (IoT) as the new paradigm of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and rapid changes in technology and urban needs urge cities around the world towards formulating smart city policies. Nevertheless, policy makers, city planners, and practitioners appear to have quite different expectations from what smart cities can offer them. This has led to the emergence of different types of smart cities and pathways of development. This paper aims to answer the research question: When comparing a selection of smart city projects, can we classify pathways for their implementation? We do this by using a cross-case research design of four cities to explore commonalities and differences in development patterns. An input-output (IO) model of smart city development is used to retrieve which design variables are at play and lead to which output. The four cases pertain to the following smart city projects: Smart Dubai, Masdar City, Barcelona Smart City, and Amsterdam Smart City. Our analysis shows that Amsterdam is based on a business-driven approach that puts innovation at its core; for Masdar, technological optimism is the main essence of the pathway; social inclusion is the focus of Barcelona Smart City; and visionary ambitious leadership is the main driver for Smart Dubai. Based on these insights, a classification for smart city development pathways is established. The results of the present study are useful to academic researchers, smart city practitioners, and policy makers. View Full-Text
Keywords: smart city; input-output model; design variables; comparative analysis; smart governance; digitization; Smart Dubai; Masdar City; Barcelona Smart City; Amsterdam Smart City smart city; input-output model; design variables; comparative analysis; smart governance; digitization; Smart Dubai; Masdar City; Barcelona Smart City; Amsterdam Smart City
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Noori, N.; Hoppe, T.; de Jong, M. Classifying Pathways for Smart City Development: Comparing Design, Governance and Implementation in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104030

AMA Style

Noori N, Hoppe T, de Jong M. Classifying Pathways for Smart City Development: Comparing Design, Governance and Implementation in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi. Sustainability. 2020; 12(10):4030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104030

Chicago/Turabian Style

Noori, Negar, Thomas Hoppe, and Martin de Jong. 2020. "Classifying Pathways for Smart City Development: Comparing Design, Governance and Implementation in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi" Sustainability 12, no. 10: 4030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104030

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop