Participatory Governance in the Digitalization Process of a Smart City: The Case of the Municipality of Rome

Abstract

A smart city can be defined as an urban ecosystem that combines new technologies related to digitalization in infrastructure, governance models, and everyday life, as well as inclusivity and stakeholder participation for achieving effectiveness and long-term sustainability. Although many frameworks and co-creative governance approaches emphasize the importance of integrating diverse perspectives in urban innovation, the practical implementation of stakeholder engagement remains a significant challenge in the development of digital strategies. This persistent difficulty often stems from factors such as varying levels of digital literacy, power asymmetries among stakeholders, and insufficient mechanisms for meaningful participation. As a result, there is a risk that smart city initiatives may fall short of their potential to deliver inclusive and sustainable outcomes, ultimately undermining both the legitimacy and the long-term effectiveness of urban digital transformation processes. This is especially relevant in the Italian context. Indeed, despite the relevant number of papers dedicated to stakeholder engagement in smart cities, few studies have explored how municipalities implement these innovative strategies, and even fewer have within the Italian context. This research aims to fill this gap by analyzing the stakeholder engagement in Rome’s smart city strategy and the effectiveness of participatory and co-creative approaches in transforming a city into an effective smart city. The research results reveal that the experience of the Rome Smart City Lab (RSCL) creates a model of participatory governance where the stakeholders can co-create the digital innovation strategies of a municipality and where the stakeholder techniques are fully implemented. The research results provide interesting results useful for both academics and policymakers involved in the digital transformation of a smart city, since the RSCL’s approach confirms that digitalization initiatives become more effective and efficient when they are shaped by the very individuals and groups responsible for their implementation. This participatory process seems to enhance the adaptability and sustainability of digital strategies over time, ultimately contributing to the realization of truly inclusive smart cities.

1. Introduction

In the 21st century, urbanization has grown considerably, creating increasing pressure on cities and challenges regarding sustainability, governance models, infrastructure, and overall quality of life. In response, over the last 10 years, cities have accelerated the adoption of measures to foster digitalization. This process was sped up by the lockdowns imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced cities and, in general, cities’ public administrations, to find digital solutions for their activities and become a “Smart City” [1].

A smart city can be defined as an urban ecosystem that combines new technologies related to digitalization (i.e., ICT, artificial intelligence, Big Data, data analytics) and implements them into infrastructure, governance models, and everyday life, also factoring in inclusivity and stakeholder participation [2]. A smart city can effectively manage mobility, infrastructures, energy use, waste management, connectivity, and public services thanks to digitalization solutions (see [3,4]). More generally, “a smart city is using ICT to make a city (administration, education, transportation, etc.) more intelligent and efficient” [5].

In smart cities, governments, businesses, universities, and citizens cooperate to tackle urban challenges through smart governance, sustainability initiatives, and community engagement [6,7]. Thus, a relevant challenge to developing a smart city is the ability of local institutions to promote an effective stakeholder engagement strategy. One key aspect is to understand which is the best way to involve actors (including governments, citizens, civil society, companies, and universities) in developing shared solutions.

In the past, cities adopted, for the most part, consultation processes (top-down planning approaches), while in the last few years, they have been trying to develop participatory and co-creation strategies, where stakeholder collaboration plays a crucial role (demand-driven approach) [8]. This change is particularly important in large cities, where governance complexity and diverse socio-economic dynamics require context-specific, adaptive, and inclusive strategies.

Several frameworks, such as Living Labs, the triple helix model, and co-creative governance approaches, stress the need for integrating multiple perspectives in urban innovation [7]. Nevertheless, stakeholder engagement continues to be challenging, as issues such as power imbalances, limited citizen participation, and lack of cross-sector coordination often impede the full implementation of smart city policies [9].

The existing literature and research on stakeholder engagement in smart cities has only partially examined how municipalities practically implement these innovative strategies, especially in the Italian context.

This limitation is evident when considering research indexed in Scopus, which we searched using the following keywords: “stakeholder AND engagement AND smart AND cities AND Italy.” Searching for these words in titles, abstracts, and full texts only yields six results for the five-year period from 2020 to 2025; on the BASE search engine, the keywords “stakeholder engagement smart cities Italy” and filtering for “stakeholder engagement” produced just four results, and even fewer results were noted when the filters were “smart city” and “citizen engagement” (only two).

This outcome underscores a significant research gap regarding stakeholder engagement in the transformation of smart cities in Italy. Addressing this gap is relevant, since Italy is one of the most populous countries in the European Union and has recently launched the Digital Italy strategy (initiated in the second half of 2021), aimed at accelerating the country’s digital transformation by 2026; a process expected to bring many Italian cities to the threshold of full digitalization.

Having said that, the paper will analyze the case of Rome, the Capital of Italy, and the most populated and geographically extensive Italian city, as it has nearly 3 million inhabitants and covers an area of approximately 1240 km².

In particular, this study investigates the smart city strategies adopted by Rome, evaluates the extent of stakeholder engagement, and explores the effectiveness of participatory and co-creative methods in facilitating the city’s transition towards a fully realized smart city. This study employs an exploratory qualitative research design, centered on an in-depth case study of the Municipality of Rome. Primary data were collected through semi-structured interviews with key institutional stakeholders and systematic document analysis of relevant municipal policies and initiatives.

The methodology enables a nuanced understanding of the strategies and outcomes associated with Rome’s smart city trajectory, offering new empirical evidence on the effectiveness of stakeholder engagement and participatory governance in a major European metropolitan area.

Furthermore, this study is expected to have a concrete impact on both policymakers and broader stakeholder communities. The findings provide actionable insights that can inform future digital policy frameworks, guide stakeholder engagement strategies, and support the institutionalization of inclusive co-design processes in urban innovation. In this sense, the case of Rome serves as a potential blueprint for other cities aiming to foster more democratic, adaptive, and citizen-centered digitalization trajectories.

The article is organized as follows: Section 2 is dedicated to the literature review, while Section 3 presents the Material and Methods applied in this research. Section 4 presents and examines the results and Section 5 discusses the conclusions.

2. Literature Review

Digitalization is a key feature of national and European agendas, and accordingly, being smart is a point on the urban agenda of many European cities [10]. Digitalization is considered a process that strives to enhance an entity by initiating important changes to its properties and combining the technologies of computing, information, communication, and connectivity [11,12]. In this sense, digitalization means ushering in significant improvements such as higher efficiency, better performance, and enhanced service delivery. Moreover, digitalization promotes greater transparency, participation, and cooperation [13].

Digitalization is increasingly transforming urban centers all over the world, making cities more efficient, sustainable, and responsive to the needs of their residents. The integration of digital technologies into urban environments enhances public services, improves infrastructure management, while also creating and expanding economic opportunities [14]. This shift towards smart cities leverages technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and big data analytics to optimize urban operations and decision-making processes [15].

One of the primary advantages of digitalization in smart cities is that it can enhance city management and governance. Data-driven decision-making allows local authorities to optimize the allocation of resources, reduce the consumption of energy, and improve urban mobility [16]. Smart grids, intelligent transportation systems, and e-governance platforms enable governments to provide more effective, efficient, and transparent services while promoting citizen engagement [17].

Digital transformation is also crucial for improving sustainability within smart cities. Indeed, by adopting smart infrastructural and environmentally aware technologies, urban centers can minimize their carbon footprint and enhance the resilience required to address climate change [10,18]. Over this issue smart waste-management systems, sensor-based water-distribution networks, and AI-driven air-quality monitoring can contribute significantly to the generation of more sustainable urban living environments [19,20].

It is also worth noticing that digitalization fosters economic growth by promoting the development of innovative hubs, digital entrepreneurship, and knowledge-based economies. Cities that embrace digital transformation attract investments, create new job opportunities, and enhance their global competitiveness [21]. The emergence of digital platforms and smart services encourages collaboration between businesses, governments, and academia while driving urban innovation and economic dynamism [22].

However, despite numerous benefits, the digitalization of smart cities presents challenges that need to be tackled. Issues such as data privacy, cybersecurity, and digital inequality require comprehensive strategies capable of ensuring inclusive and secure smart city development [23]. Furthermore, understanding and reducing the digital divide is essential when striving to guarantee that all citizens, regardless of their socio-economic backgrounds, are enabled to benefit from technological advancements [24,25,26].

Last but not least, digitalization might prove to be a key driver of sustainable urban development, able to staunch the excessively rapid advancement of urbanization. By fostering digital culture, and promoting ethical data governance, urban centers can fully exploit the potential of digitalization and thus enhance quality of life, addressing pressing urban challenges [27]. To achieve this, the involvement of stakeholders may prove essential.

Regarding the role of civil servants in the creation of smart cities, some authors have highlighted the importance of the Chief Digital Officer for a city that intends to become truly smart [28]. Scuotto et al. [28] have pointed out that Chief Digital Officers (CDOs) are capable of triggering creativity associated with digitalization and organization and can, therefore, play a pivotal role and be instrumental in driving the digitalization of cities.

A significant amount of the literature has investigated the role played by CDOs in the advancement and fostering of smart cities (e.g., [29,30,31]). Westerman, Bonnet, and McAfee [32], for example, discuss the role of the CDO and his/her responsibility when defining digital strategies and “driving an organization through the digital transformation of its business”. Matt, Hess, and Benlian [33], in a paper published a year later, added the role of the CDO to those of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) as the principal leaders engaged in digital transformation and described this role as a new and innovative one.

Different studies, such as Singh and Hess [29], have stated that CDOs would be charged with the implementation of digital-related initiatives and actions, while the role of Chief Innovation Officers would be, above all, that of implementing innovation and digitalization, the responsibility of the Chief Strategy Officers would be for the development of their organizations’ overall strategy [29,34].

Stakeholder Engagement: A Bridge Between Digitalization and Sustainability

In this context, recent research has underlined the importance of a citizen-centered approach to smart city development, referring in particular to the role stakeholder engagement could play to foster and accelerate digitalization and smart city strategies (Digital tools and platforms shape social interactions intensely [35]. Open innovation, boosted through stakeholder engagement in living-lab environments—where research and innovation merge with real-life urban settings—has proven to be an efficient strategy in molding smarter cities [36,37].

It means that stakeholder engagement provides society with positive effects as a whole, rather than simply favoring individuals, while ushering new values into the urban landscape [38]. Social inclusion and equitable participation become crucial features of this system [39], capable of integrating various sectors such as governments, businesses, schools, non-profit organizations, and citizens, thus creating a common framework.

Stakeholder engagement is central to smart city development, ensuring that digital transformation responds to the needs of urban populations. The concept of “smart city” is also reflected in the evolving notion of “Cognitive Cities,” where urban environments learn and adapt continuously by interacting with their inhabitants [40].

The definition of a stakeholder can be summarized as “those who possess attributes of power, urgency, legitimacy, and proximity, and who either influence and/or are influenced by municipal goals and urban governance” [41]. This definition intentionally casts a wide net of different subjects, encompassing governments, citizens, tourists, industries, civil society, non-governmental organizations, and the academic community [42]. Across these heterogeneous actors, the literature agrees on a core claim: meaningful engagement is a necessary condition for successful digitalization efforts.

According to Freeman’s view [43], stakeholder engagement provides a strategic framework through which organizational success can be achieved, a position which is supported by empirical investigation of strategic management [44] and extended in the studies conducted by Brunetti et al., which show engagement as a key factor for the improvement of formulation and execution of efficient strategy [45].

In the public sector, studies have highlighted that the attitudes of civil servants and their willingness to adopt technology shape digital transformation outcomes, conditioning the effectiveness and the sustainability [46,47]. All these studies together outline that digitalization in cities cannot be reduced to technology procurement or infrastructure rollout, but it must be understood as a relational and governance problem in which legitimacy, capability, and responsiveness are co-produced with stakeholders.

Within smart-city strategies, this relational perspective gains further traction. As Mostashari argues, “citizens are not merely participants in urban governance but also sensors, actively molding and influencing urban infrastructures” [48]. Smart City Platforms promote stakeholder engagement by organizing interactions among different actors, leveraging network effects, and relying on intermediary organizations to facilitate sustained engagement [49].

The downstream effects are not merely procedural but also substantial: community engagement has been shown to foster social sustainability [50,51,52] and, when organized through robust, inclusive processes, to support long-term urban sustainability (Foth, Brynskov, and Ojala [53]; Harvey [54]). Given these results, the rationale behind a strategic smart-city agenda must prioritize citizen engagement and plural stakeholder participation in shaping urban living conditions [55].

In practical terms, stakeholder engagement enhances the acceptance of projects, aligns services with actual needs, and strengthens public commitment to investment [9].

Strengthening stakeholder collaboration is a vital lever for sustainability—locally and globally—by aligning power, urgency, and legitimacy across governance levels and sectors [56,57,58].

Cities are, therefore, reshaping their relationships with stakeholders by promoting more dynamic, competitive environments that respond promptly to societal needs [59]. The rapid advancement of digital technologies is facilitating this shift, helping cities to provide better online services for institutions, businesses, and residents while simultaneously improving the quality of life and urban competitiveness. However, given the variety of stakeholders involved, it is increasingly difficult to engage with them, and case studies are needed to provide best practices [60,61].

3. Materials and Methods

This study adopts an exploratory approach, as our literature review indicates that the research topic is still in its early developmental phase. Consequently, we employed a qualitative methodology, which is particularly effective for delving deeper into specific issues [62].

In line with this approach, we chose a case study analysis, since it is a valuable tool for collecting data in emerging or new fields of research and within real-world settings where phenomena have not yet been extensively analyzed [63,64,65]. The case study method allows researchers to observe and document the complexities of actual practices as they unfold, capturing the nuances and contextual factors that might be overlooked by more rigid or quantitative methods. By grounding our analysis in a real-world environment, we were able to obtain rich, detailed insights that would not be available otherwise.

A case study allows for the direct collection of information from stakeholders and participants, offering a holistic and multi-dimensional understanding of the digitalization strategy under examination, enhancing our findings and making them replicable in other urban contexts. Additionally, the use of case study methodology facilitates the verification and triangulation of data, supporting the robustness of our conclusions and providing a solid foundation for subsequent studies that may seek to expand or test our findings in future research.

We selected the case of the Municipality of Rome, which was recently involved in a process of stakeholder engagement as a boost for the creation of a sustainable and smart city.

An important prerequisite for conducting case study research is the formulation of a comprehensive research protocol to demonstrate reliability and enhance methodological rigor. A research protocol serves as a systematic plan detailing the procedures and criteria guiding data collection, analysis, and validation, thereby minimizing researcher bias and improving replicability [61].

In line with these methodological standards, this study adopts a research approach aimed at ensuring depth, validity, and analytical robustness. Specifically, the methodological framework comprises four distinct yet interconnected stages:

(i)

Desk research, which involves the systematic collection and document analysis of municipal policies, strategic urban planning documents, and initiatives related to smart-city development, aimed at providing a thorough contextual understanding and identification of key thematic areas (Figure 1);

(ii)

Semi-structured interviews, designed and conducted with key players actively involved in the processes of digital transformation and stakeholder engagement within the municipality of Rome, with the purpose of eliciting expert insights and experiential data;

(iii)

Content analysis, executed rigorously to identify and analyze patterns, themes, and discourse within the gathered textual data (documents and interview transcripts), allowing for structured interpretation and theory-building;

(iv)

Triangulation of data, involving critical cross-verification through multiple data sources, to ensure the internal validity, reliability, and accuracy of the findings, thereby reducing bias and enhancing confidence in the research outcomes.

More specifically, we started the research through a systematic examination of the official website of the Roma Smart City Lab [66], a critical review of the press releases, news articles, official communications issued both by the media and documents which describe municipal policies, strategic urban planning documents, and initiatives related to smart city development by the Municipality of Rome, after that three interviews with key people were conducted: (i) the President of the “Consulta Roma smart city Lab” (R1), (ii) the President of “Committee on Rome Capital, the Statute and Technological Innovation” (R2), and the Director of the Department for Digital Transformation.

They represent the three key figures essential for understanding the strategic framework underlying the digitalization process of Rome.

The first represents the Commission of the Rome municipality in charge of the strategy for the city’s technological innovation. The Roma Smart City Lab (For further details see also www.labsmartcityroma.it (accessed on 15 September 2025)) (hereinafter also RSCL) is a support instrument for the municipality on strategic issues related to innovation and digital transformation. It is a multistakeholder board that brings together all relevant stakeholders involved in the design of the city’s future. The Roma Smart City Lab adopts a multidisciplinary approach, creating a shared space in which municipalities engage with stakeholders, associations, companies, universities, and other entities. The Smart City Lab also facilitates the implementation of the Roma Smart City Plan and the development of future projects.

The second interviewee embodies the political dimension of governance, responsible for policy formulation and for assessing bottom-up proposals originating from citizens and stakeholder groups.

The third interviewee reflects the administrative dimension, entrusted with operationalizing political decisions into tangible measures and ensuring their consistent implementation across the organizational structure.

The interviews, with a duration of each of about 30 min in Italian, were recorded, transcribed, and subsequently analyzed using manual content analysis. Then, we reinforced our findings by triangulating the interview data with secondary sources, thereby increasing the validity of our results. These secondary sources—comprising official documents, and web sources—were also examined through manual content analysis. Appendix A provides the structure of the interviews conducted in this research, the profile of the interview, and the documents examined.

Specifically, the three interviewees were selected on the basis of their pivotal roles within the digitalization strategy of Roma Capitale, as they constitute some of the most prominent institutional and administrative actors engaged in its conception and implementation.

In addition, the sample addresses the three levels of the stakeholder engagement system: the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab, responsible for stakeholder engagement and to bring ideas coming from stakeholders to the attention of policymakers (R1); the policymakers, which evaluates and translates bottom-up proposals into political decisions (R2); and the Department for Digital Transformation, which is in charge of operationalizing these decisions and ensuring their concrete implementation (R3).

This explains why only three interviews were conducted, since given the hierarchical and rigid structure of the governance model, only a limited number of individuals occupy top strategic positions, making them uniquely qualified to provide comprehensive insights into the process, since they covered the overall stakeholder engagement system. The interviews were conducted following the same manual content analysis procedure, thereby ensuring methodological coherence of the entire research process. They were selected on the basis of the evidence emerging from documentary materials, which identified them as key figures within the digitalization strategy of the Municipality of Rome.

The comparison among the three interviews revealed a shared strategic direction and a common pursuit of objectives, indicating substantial alignment across institutional levels. However, certain critical issues also emerged. In particular, the third interview highlighted potential overlaps between the proposals formulated by the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab and those advanced by the political body, pointing to coordination challenges within the governance framework.

The documentary sources were likewise chosen according to their administrative and political relevance. In particular, the Statute of Roma Capitale and the Strategic Plan (Piano Strategico) were essential, as they represent powers, the mechanisms through which they are exercised, and the extent to which the planned timeline has been respected. The triangulation between documentary analysis and interviews was conducted by carefully examining official documents, identifying their objectives, the distribution of power across the different sectors, and the overall implementation timelines. The analysis began with the

Programma Triennale dei Lavori Pubblici (Three-Year Public Works Program D4), the Piano Integrato di Attività e Organizzazione (Integrated Plan of Activities and Organization D5), the Piano Roma Smart City 2021 (Rome Smart City Plan 2021 D3), and the Statuto of Roma Smart City Lab (Statute of the Rome Smart City Lab D2) in order to gain an initial understanding of Roma Capitale’s strategic orientation. Subsequently, the Statuto di Roma Capitale (Statue of Rome Municipality D1) was analyzed to determine which institutional actors were responsible for the digitalization process and stakeholder engagement. Following this preliminary phase, the most relevant representatives from each sector involved in the digitalization strategy were selected and interviewed.

In this context, the content of the official documents was systematically compared with the insights that emerged from the interviews.

The Structure and Management of the Consulta

Over the past decade, Rome has progressively embraced a strategic paradigm shift toward becoming a smart city, characterized by the integration of digital innovation, environmental sustainability, and inclusive governance models.

Roma Capitale launched the Piano Roma Smart City (Rome Smart City Plan) in March 2021 (Municipality of Rome, 2021), which articulates a comprehensive strategic vision for the city’s digital and ecological transition. The strategy is the result of a local legislative process started in 2017. Central to the plan is the deployment of the Roma Data Platform, a cross-sectoral data infrastructure intended to enhance urban decision-making processes, optimize resource allocation, and foster transparency and accountability in public service delivery.

Thus, the evolution of Rome’s smart city strategy between 2017 and 2025 reflects the adoption of an integrated urban governance model, grounded in multi-actor collaboration, technological advancement, and sustainability imperatives. As such, Rome constitutes a pertinent case study within the broader European discourse on smart urbanism, particularly concerning the institutionalization of stakeholder engagement and data-driven policy innovation.

A critical milestone in this trajectory was the establishment, in November 2020, of the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab [65], a formalized multistakeholder platform designed to institutionalize participatory governance mechanisms in the formulation of urban innovation policies.

The Consulta Roma Smart City Lab operates as a collaborative governance framework, engaging representatives from public authorities, private sector actors, research institutions, universities, professional associations, and civil society organizations (see Figure 2). It adopts a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together representatives from the Municipality of Rome, citizens, associations, businesses, universities, and research institutions.

Between 2020 and 2021, the Lab structured its activities around 11 thematic working groups, covering strategic domains such as sustainable mobility, energy transition, urban security, economic development, cultural heritage, tourism, social inclusion, education, urban transformation, environment, and agile work practices (see

Table 1. The 11 working groups. Source: own elaboration.

N.	Name
1	Environment, Climate & Energy
2	Infrastructure, Mobility & Public Space
3	Urban Planning, Regeneration & Housing
4	Digital, Data & Artificial Intelligence
5	Digital Rights, Transparency & Participation
6	Health, Sport & Well-Being
7	Education, Culture & Digital Skills
8	Work, Economic Development & Social Innovation
9	Tourism, Creativity & Local Commerce
10	Urban Security, Resilience & Civil Protection
11	Governance, Finance & Urban Policy Monitoring

). Each group is led by a coordinator who collaborates closely with representatives from the various stakeholder categories and officials from the Municipality of Rome.

Through these working groups, Rome has sought to operationalize a co-creative approach to urban policymaking, aiming to align innovation trajectories with the needs and expectations of a diverse set of stakeholders. This process is particularly valuable for systematically identifying the most salient themes that should be prioritized by local policymakers and for surfacing innovative, forward-looking solutions capable of advancing the city’s smart transformation. The outputs generated by the thematic working groups are synthesized annually into a formal report submitted to institutional decision-makers, thereby contributing directly to the municipal innovation agenda.

The primary objectives of the RSCL include facilitating the implementation of the Roma Smart City Plan, systematically monitoring ongoing projects, and initiating future initiatives through a co-design methodology underpinned by robust stakeholder engagement. Specifically, the Roma Smart City Plan comprises 81 innovation projects, 40 of which have already been implemented and are subject to ongoing evaluation using established Smart Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and other urban performance metrics. Within this framework, stakeholder engagement is becoming increasingly critical as it fosters a holistic and inclusive participatory approach, marking a significant evolution from traditional top-down governance models.

Concerning governance, the RSCL operates under the strategic guidance of a Steering Committee, whose President is democratically elected by its members. This Steering Committee is appointed by the Stakeholder Assembly, consisting of (at the moment) 125 representatives drawn from diverse sectors, including businesses, professional associations, universities, research institutions, trade unions, and public authorities.

4. Results

After presenting the objectives and governance model of the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab (RSCL), this section provides the results from the interviews collected from the current President of the Consulta (named R1), from one Councilor of the Municipality of Rome who is responsible for innovation (named R2) and from the Director of the Department for Digital Transformation (named R3), and an analysis of the documents.

The results are summarized as follows (see Appendix A for the questions).

Starting from R1, he delineated the RSCL as an innovative governance structure explicitly designed to enhance stakeholder participation within Roma Capitale’s broader digital transformation strategy. R1 described the RSCL as an advanced innovation laboratory, strategically engaging over 200 stakeholders, including businesses, startups, academic institutions, research bodies, neighborhood associations, and civic committees. This extensive stakeholder network underscores RSCL’s commitment to a multidimensional governance approach, emphasizing the centrality of participatory processes and stakeholder-driven co-creation in municipal decision-making (“The Smart City Lab operates with a multidisciplinary approach that makes it possible to bring together, in a single place, the city administration along with citizens, associations, businesses, universities, and research centers, in order to support the implementation of the Rome Smart City plan and the development of projects”).

Crucially, the RSCL seeks to invert traditional municipal governance models by embracing a bottom-up innovation framework. R1 articulated this transformative vision clearly, demonstrating how citizen-driven proposals are collected, systematically analyzed, and subsequently integrated into strategic decision-making. R1 provided the concrete example such as the “Smart Bench” initiative, illustrating how a direct stakeholder input effectively generates tangible and sustainable urban improvements. According to R1, this project exemplifies the potential for stakeholder-generated ideas to evolve into practical urban solutions with measurable impacts on daily life (“We want to revolutionize innovation in Rome by overturning the paradigm. We want citizens, that is, associations such as neighborhood groups, to propose projects to us, and these projects are brought upwards, to the technical and political decision-makers for implementation”).

Regarding stakeholder engagement mechanisms, R1 detailed comprehensive internal and external engagement processes. Internally, municipal departments, agencies, and administrative branches participate actively through RSCL’s structured thematic working tables. Externally, stakeholder integration occurs primarily via thematic working groups, each aligned directly with specific municipal administrative competencies, ensuring the coherent integration of community insights into digital policies. Additionally, R1 emphasized the forthcoming introduction of an interactive digital platform aimed at scaling stakeholder engagement from an intermediary-based model to direct interaction with Rome’s broader citizenry. (“Roma Capitale has decided to provide the Consulta with an interactive portal with the citizens [...] The portal is fundamental because [...] at the moment when we instead open the discussion with all the citizens, that is, with 3 million citizens, evidently without technological support it is impossible to open this thing”).

The RSCL also actively explores integrating advanced technological tools, such as artificial intelligence (AI), to enhance stakeholder communication and inform strategy development through data-driven insights. This future-oriented perspective underscores RSCL’s dedication to continually refining participatory governance mechanisms, thereby increasing both efficiency and responsiveness in Roma Capitale’s digital transition. R1 concluded by positioning the RSCL as the strategic facilitator of a participatory, citizen-centric governance model, representing a significant paradigm shift in municipal digital and urban planning (“We are thinking of creating [...] a communication channel with the citizens, also with artificial intelligence [...] through a sort of collaboration that we will launch at the next assembly of the Consulta”.

Moving to Respondent 2 (R2), he expanded upon this foundational vision, providing complementary and critical insights. R2 reaffirmed RSCL’s essential role in transitioning Roma Capitale toward a bottom-up innovation framework, emphasizing a strategic focus on simplifying and improving digital public service accessibility. He highlighted how the RSCL proactively addresses social inequalities through targeted digital facilitation programs, particularly benefitting vulnerable populations such as the elderly, thus reinforcing the inclusive dimension of RSCL’s strategy. (“Our vision of digitalization and technological innovation is closely linked to an idea of social innovation: we want technology not to amplify inequalities, but to help reduce them. For this reason, we have developed a system that protects the most vulnerable groups of the population, expanding, for example, the network of digital facilitation”).

Significantly, R2 elaborated on RSCL’s strategic partnerships, notably highlighting its collaboration with Roma Technopole as a critical differentiator. This partnership ensures alignment between RSCL’s thematic working groups and Roma Technopole’s industry planning processes, thereby embedding community needs directly into technological innovation from early developmental stages. R2 described the RSCL as a critical intermediary linking industry, institutional bodies, and local communities, fundamentally reshaping digital policy governance and implementation in Rome. (“We have started a dialogue between the Consulta and Roma Technopole [...] In this way [...] the Consulta [can] intervene already at the stage of industrial planning, bringing to the attention of the institutions and companies the real needs of the citizens”).

Moreover, R2 clarified RSCL’s formal administrative and legislative authority, explicitly distinguishing it from traditional advisory roles. He detailed RSCL’s institutional capacity to submit policy proposals directly to the Municipal Assembly, emphasizing its significant influence comparable to elected officials. This structural empowerment enhances the practical translation of stakeholder-generated ideas into concrete municipal policies and actionable projects. (“The Smart City Consulta [...] is not only an advisory body, but a real institutional entity with functions comparable to those of an additional city councilor. In fact, the Consulta has the possibility to present its own resolutions to the Capitoline Assembly”).

R2 also underscored RSCL’s integration of advanced digital technologies, specifically highlighting operational initiatives such as the implementation of ‘Giulia’, a certified public-administration-oriented AI system. Furthermore, he detailed future plans to incorporate blockchain technology, essential for enhancing data reliability and security. These technological integrations explicitly complement R1’s strategic vision, providing concrete examples of RSCL’s technological innovation in participatory governance. (“I cannot fail to mention Giulia, the tool that we introduced last March 1st: it is the first artificial intelligence made available by a public administration. [...] As for the blockchain [...] we are working to integrate this technology, because security and the proper use of data are fundamental aspects”).

Lastly, R2 identified internal administrative challenges, particularly emphasizing the critical need for enhanced digital competencies among municipal staff. He outlined ongoing training programs and structural reforms as necessary conditions for achieving RSCL’s comprehensive digital transformation goals, thus addressing a practical operational dimension less emphasized by R1. (“The main difficulty today is the lack of adequate skills within the administrative machinery [...] a significant investment in continuous training is necessary, so that they can acquire the skills needed to manage the digital transformation”).

Last but not least R3, the Director of the Department for Digital Transformation, provided an institutional and operational perspective confirming and deepening the outcomes of the interviews conducted with R1 and R2. Notably R3 described Roma Capitale’s digital transformation strategy as structured across three levels: infrastructure, data management, and service delivery (“The strategy of Roma Capitale is essentially based on three levels: the first is infrastructural, the second concerns data management, and the third focuses on improving digital services for citizens”). Explaining the infrastructural level, R3 referred to the large-scale public–private partnership project to deploy 5G coverage across all underground lines and 100 urban squares, which will be equipped with free Wi-Fi, environmental monitoring stations, and video surveillance systems (“It is planned to extend 5G coverage to all Rome metro lines [...] and to 100 squares, 50 of which have already been completed [...] featuring free Wi-Fi, video surveillance, and air quality monitoring”). These measures are imagined as enabling smart city services and thus create the technical foundations for citizen-led innovation as promoted by the RSCL. When describing the data management level, R3 introduced the “Roma Data Platform,” a centralized data infrastructure crafted to integrate different information flows and feed the AI-based assistant “Julia” (“We are currently carrying out a project to develop a virtual assistant based on generative artificial intelligence, called Julia [...] To make this project possible, we have re-engineered our data management system”). He also made clear that the platform includes real-time data on mobility, health, and culture, but not sensitive administrative information to ensure privacy compliance (“Data relating to the civil registry or building sector are not included [...] as they are subject to privacy laws.”). R3 also addressed operational challenges and coordination issues among departments, highlighting “overlapping” between RSCL’s proposals and ongoing municipal projects. He mentioned the video surveillance initiatives proposed by the RSCL that in some case duplicated efforts already covered by the 5G plan (“It happened that the Consulta proposed an advanced video surveillance system for Piazza Risorgimento [...] but that square was already included in the 5G project”). This overlap, according to him, arises because of the complexity of managing multiple departments and projects in a vast administrative structure such as Roma Capitale (“This is a municipality made up of 15 departments and 15 local districts [...] where information is not always readily accessible to everyone”). R3 emphasized that all major digitalization projects—such as the 5G network, Julia, and the modernization of the local police operation center—are progressing on schedule, or even ahead of it, highlighting that stakeholder engagement does not create red tape. (“We are aligned with the objectives and, in some cases, even ahead of schedule […] Julia became operational in March 2025, well before the PNRR deadline”). This statement provides empirical validation of RSCL’s contribution to strategic coherence across administrative and participatory levels. In conclusion, R3 stressed that citizen participation, promoted and facilitated by the RSCL, is crucial for achieving behavioral and cultural change toward sustainability, confirming the participatory nature of the strategy (“The goal is for the citizen to become a co-author rather than a mere recipient of top-down strategies”). The validity of these interview findings is reinforced by comprehensive secondary documentation analyzed: Roma Capitale’s Statute (D1), the Regolamento della Consulta Roma Smart City Lab (D2), the Piano Roma Smart City 2021 (D3), Programma Triennale dei Lavori Pubblici (D4), and il Piano Integrato di Attività e Organizzazione (D5). To ensure methodological robustness, the triangulation between documentary analysis and interviews was conducted by carefully examining official documents, identifying their objectives, the distribution of power across the different sectors, and the overall implementation timelines. These documents collectively emphasize the principles of transparency, civic engagement, and participatory governance, which underpin RSCL’s operations and strategy. D1 advocates for enhanced citizen involvement through digital technologies, aligning closely with the participatory model described by R1, R2, and R3. D2 explicitly positions the RSCL as an essential stakeholder engagement tool, directly facilitating an Open Government model characterized by active co-creation. Furthermore, D3 outlines Roma Capitale’s strategic vision for a sustainable and participatory urban environment, emphasizing the critical role of technological innovations and collaborative stakeholder engagement in improving urban services. D4 and D5 outline the planning framework and timeline used to assess whether the actions undertaken were consistent with the objectives and activities initially planned.

Overall, the three interviews and aforementioned documents reveal a coherent and complementary strategy underpinning Rome’s digital transformation and its participatory governance model. R1, R2, and R3 acknowledge that the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab (RSCL) represents a structural and significant innovation in urban governance, promoting a transition from a top-down administrative decision-making process to a more participatory and co-creative framework.

The three interviewees further confirm that stakeholder engagement constitutes both a strategic and operational pillar of Rome’s digital transition, fostering the inclusion of diverse actors in shaping urban innovation.

While R1 emphasized the participatory and citizen-driven nature of the Consulta, R2 highlighted its social and institutional dimension, particularly its ability to reduce inequalities through digital inclusion.

R3 provided a technical and managerial perspective, identifying organizational and coordination challenges that must be addressed to avoid duplication of proposals and overlapping efforts. The analysis therefore reveals a digitalization strategy for Roma Capitale characterized by a strong alignment between political vision, participatory mechanisms, and administrative implementation.

At the same time, it highlights certain critical areas for improvement—particularly concerning coordination among departments and the need to broaden participation beyond representative bodies through digital tools. Taken as a whole, the interviews and the documents offer a comprehensive understanding of how participatory governance, technology, and administrative capacity interact in shaping the city’s transformation toward a sustainable smart city model.

5. Discussion

The process of developing a participatory governance model began when the Rome Municipality decided to strengthen its Department of Digital Transformation and to expand the network of online public services. Particular emphasis was placed on simplifying, streamlining, and improving the accessibility of administrative procedures. This objective was supported by a forward-looking vision oriented toward social innovation, wherein technology is not seen as a factor that exacerbates inequalities, but rather as a means to reduce them, through the establishment of a digital facilitation network designed to support the most vulnerable segments of the population, such as the elderly. (R2: “Our vision of digitalization and technological innovation is closely linked to an idea of social innovation: we want technology not to amplify inequalities, but to help reduce them. For this reason, we have developed a system that protects the most vulnerable groups of the population, expanding, for example, the network of digital facilitators”).

The findings are consistent with the consolidated body of literature highlighting the central role of stakeholder engagement in the design and implementation of smart city strategies. As argued by Meijer and Bolívar [17], the governance of smart cities cannot be reduced to technological innovation alone; rather, it requires the inclusion of diverse social actors to ensure legitimacy, transparency, and accountability in public decision-making. This position is further reinforced by Beck and Storopoli [42], who conceptualize the smart city through the lens of stakeholder theory, emphasizing that the creation of shared value among public institutions, citizens, and private actors is essential to achieving sustainable urban outcomes.

The empirical evidence gathered from the case of Rome strongly supports these perspectives. The Consulta Roma Smart City Lab represents a tangible example of what Ferraris et al. [6] describe as a multistakeholder integration model, in which universities, businesses, and public administrations collaborate to co-design urban innovation. Similarly, Brunetti et al. [45] highlight that co-creation processes involving multiple stakeholders enhance strategic alignment and improve the formulation and execution of digital transformation initiatives. The Rome case confirms this theoretical assumption by demonstrating that institutionalized participatory mechanisms can generate concrete outputs (such as the “Smart Bench,” the intelligent video surveillance system, and the digital check-in procedure) that translate collaborative governance into measurable innovations in public service delivery.

These findings also align with the life-cycle approach to stakeholder engagement proposed by Ehwi et al. [8], who demonstrate that participatory processes structured across planning, implementation, and evaluation phases improve the overall coherence and sustainability of smart city projects. Likewise, Beck and Ferasso [41] connect stakeholder value creation directly to the Sustainable Development Goals, underscoring the need for cities to integrate environmental and social objectives into their digital agendas. The participatory governance framework implemented by Rome, therefore, not only resonates with but extends this literature by institutionalizing co-design processes as permanent features of urban policy. Moreover, the interaction between the RSCL and Rome Technopole reflects what Ferraris et al. [6] and Brunetti et al. [45] describe as a triple-helix dynamic integrating government, academia, and industry. Similar participatory architectures can be observed in European cases such as Barcelona’s Decidim platform or Vienna’s Wien wird WOW initiative [23], confirming that inclusive governance enhances policy responsiveness and legitimacy. However, unlike these models, Rome’s framework is distinctive in its institutionalization within the municipal statute, aligning with Beck and Storopoli’s [42] argument that stakeholder value creation becomes more durable when embedded in public institutions.

In this sense, the RSCL can be interpreted as a localized expression of the cognitive city paradigm introduced by Mostashari et al. [48], where citizens act as sensors and co-producers of urban intelligence. By linking empirical observations to these theoretical contributions, this discussion situates Rome’s experience within the broader European debate on how participatory governance can drive sustainable and inclusive digital transformation.

As specified in the interviews, the city’s digital strategy rests on three structural levels: infrastructural development, data management, and service improvement. The infrastructural development level includes projects such as large-scale 5G and Wi-Fi coverage involving all metro lines and 100 public squares, an infrastructure meant to “activate smart city services” (R3: “The strategy of Roma Capitale is essentially based on three levels infrastructural development, data management, and service improvement [...] The most important infrastructure project appeared in the press under the name “5G,” but it is something that goes beyond that. In this project, the 5G coverage of all the metro lines of Roma Capitale is planned, as well as the coverage of 100 squares”).

The second level, the data management level, involves the establishment of the Roma Data Platform, a comprehensive data lake crafted to integrate mobility, environmental, and cultural information, while, at the same time, ensuring interoperability with regional and national systems and protection of sensitive data.

(R3: Our data management system is commonly known as the Roma Data Platform [...] we are currently working on this to improve it both in terms of data management and the virtual assistance system, making it more responsive to citizens and their needs)

The third level, service improvement, focuses on modeling digital services to make them more enjoyable and useful for citizens, notably through the launch of Giulia, a generative AI–based virtual assistant that personalizes access to municipal services.

(R3: Improvement of the services we intend to provide to the city’s citizens and users, as we are currently developing—and it already exists, since the first delivery was put into production in March—a project to create a virtual assistant based on generative artificial intelligence, called Jiulia).

Together, these different dimensions set the technological backbone, enabling participatory innovation and stakeholder engagement.

Within this framework lies the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab, an institutional body provided for in the Statute of Roma Capitale and specifically crafted to implement a participatory governance model. (R2: “The Smart City Consulta is an instrument provided for by the Unified Statute of Roma Capitale, which means that it is not only an advisory body, but a real institutional entity with functions comparable to those of an additional city councilor”). The RSCL aims to overturn the top-down paradigm of innovation, allowing ideas and proposals to emerge directly from citizens through committees, associations, and universities (R1: “We want to revolutionize innovation in Rome by overturning the paradigm. We want citizens, that is, associations such as neighborhood groups, to propose projects to us, and these projects are brought upwards, to the technical and political decision-makers for implementation”).

This model gives the Consulta a distinct institutional role, “with the ability to collect ideas, develop project proposals, and submit them to the City Council as deliberative proposals” (R3). Thus, the Consulta, while not holding formal political power, has influence on policy formation, ensuring that citizen-driven initiatives become part of the official agenda, and thus marking a shift from vision to action, embedding stakeholder engagement as a permanent governance and co-design structure.

To date, the RSCL represents a permanent innovation laboratory as well as an institutional body capable of serving as a platform for listening and co-design involving both citizens and stakeholders. It is also entitled to submit its resolutions and actively contribute to strategic decision-making processes in the fields of innovation and digital transformation.

Of particular significance is the synergy established between RSLC and Rome Technopole, a strategic foundation that brings together leading academic institutions, research centers, and major industrial actors such as ENEA, Leonardo, and Microsoft. This integration enables the RSLC’s thematic working groups, such as the one focused on sustainable mobility, to engage in direct dialog with the most advanced sectors of the technology industry and to contribute to the design of solutions that address the city’s concrete needs (R2: “This allows the Consulta to intervene already at the stage of industrial planning, bringing to the attention of the institutions and companies the real needs of the citizens”).

This interaction is carried out through technical tables within the Consulta, whose outcomes are then referred to the Commissione Statuto e Innovazione of Roma Capitale. (R3 “the Consulta has organized its activity in thematic tables that report to the political level, and when the proposals are approved by the City Council, they are included in the three-year plan and financed accordingly.”)

A collaboration allows the RSLC to participate from the earliest stages of industrial planning, highlighting the real needs of citizens to institutions and businesses. At the same time, it enables Roma Technopole to test its solutions even before they become operational, using discussion groups that, from a sociological perspective, could be defined as verification and control panels.

Last but not least, the RSCL wants to overcome the traditional top-down governance paradigm, in which innovation policies are designed and imposed from above, with citizens merely acting as passive recipients. Instead, it aims to adopt a bottom-up approach, in which citizens, businesses, universities, and research centers actively participate in shaping digitalization strategies. In this way, the RSLC is transformed into a genuine co-design, fostering inclusive and collaborative processes in public innovation.

The Consulta is currently still in its initial phase, which affects the configuration of stakeholder engagement, making it not yet direct and immediate but rather mediated by representatives. Currently, the interaction between the administration and various stakeholders does not occur, for example, with citizens or individual workers, but rather through intermediate bodies such as associations, committees, professional orders, and other organized civil society groups. Although effective, this model leaves space for certain critical issues typical of representative participation frameworks, such as the risk of partial disintermediation or a selective filtering of citizen demands. However, a progressive shift away from this configuration has already been planned: the Consulta intends to adopt a digital platform accessible through the project’s official website, creating a public and inclusive room for direct civic participation (R1: “Roma Capitale has decided to provide the Consulta with an interactive portal with the citizens. [...] The portal is fundamental because [...] at the moment when we instead open the discussion with all the citizens, that is, with 3 million citizens, evidently without technological support it is impossible to open this thing”).

The goal is to move toward “a model in which citizens are true co-authors of the strategy,” (R3) emphasizing that the long-term aim is to use AI-based conversational systems to make digital interactions with public services easy, intuitive, and accessible by reducing procedural barriers and increasing transparency.

This digital tool will facilitate the structured collection of proposals, suggestions, and feedback from individual citizens while also strategically strengthening transparency, horizontal interaction, and the traceability of decisions. This will foster the evolution of the participatory process toward a more open, dynamic governance model, genuinely capable of engaging stakeholders, promoting public policies more closely aligned with community needs, and more effectively oriented toward social innovation.

Given that and despite being at the initial phase, it is worth noting that the Consulta has already launched three significant projects that exemplify the effectiveness of the new participatory approach.

The first of these involves the installation of an urban infrastructure—the so-called Smart Bench—powered by solar energy, which enables citizens to charge mobile devices using renewable energy. This project was born from a proposal submitted through the stakeholder engagement process, demonstrating how citizens’ ideas can be transformed into tangible solutions, integrating sustainability and innovation into everyday urban experiences.

The second project concerns the installation of an intelligent video surveillance system in one of the city’s districts (the VI Municipality), an area particularly affected by incidents of petty crime, where urban security is a key concern for both citizens and stakeholders. The project was implemented through a public–private partnership and led to the installation of AI-enabled cameras capable of preventing theft and vandalism, particularly in school buildings, which in recent years had been frequently targeted by such criminal activity.

The third project led to the adoption of a paperless check-in system for the Municipality of Rome’s headquarters at the Palazzo Senatorio building. The initiative aims to eliminate the use of paper, enhance the efficiency of visitor registration and verification processes, and reduce the environmental impact associated with traditional administrative procedures.

In addition, it is necessary to say that some of these initiatives were linked to broader infrastructural or ongoing municipal projects, as, for example, the “Smart Bench” concept that inspired later interventions, such as the new ATAC bus shelters equipped with USB charging ports, which “inherited and expanded the citizen-identified need that emerged through participatory processes.”

The establishment of the RSCL seeks to foster a profound transformation in the culture of urban governance, moving away from traditional hierarchical models toward a logic of co-creation rooted in the actual needs of citizens. As emphasized by the interviewees, the active involvement of the citizenry enables a departure from the conventional approach, where technology is selected first and needs are assessed only afterward, often resulting in a misalignment between adopted solutions and real demands. By contrast, the new strategy aims to design interventions that are tailored to the concrete needs of the territory, promoting an inclusive and adaptive smart city model.

Referring to the European scenario, the comparative analysis of European smart city strategies provides valuable insight into the diversity of governance models and priorities across urban contexts. Rome’s institutionalization of a participatory governance body demonstrates a deliberate effort to embed stakeholder engagement within municipal decision-making. This contrasts with cities like Paris, where innovation is predominantly driven by public–private consortia, and Barcelona, where digital commons and civic technologies underpin a more radical participatory framework. The inclusion of cities such as Amsterdam and Vienna further illustrates how hybrid or socially oriented approaches can support smart urban transitions. These contrasts highlight the importance of aligning smart city strategies not only with technological ambitions, but also with context-specific governance capacities, political cultures, and social equity objectives.

In the long term, the purpose is to create an ecosystem in which major technological players, such as Rome Technopole and the House of Emerging Technologies, operate through shared planning aligned with the priorities expressed by citizens. This model seeks to avoid the adoption of standardized solutions that are poorly suited to the local context and instead promotes bottom-up innovation, driven by communities and validated through ongoing dialog among institutions, citizens, and businesses. This represents a paradigm shift that could transform Rome into an international benchmark for sustainable and participatory smart cities.

Concluding, the case of Rome demonstrates how institutionalized participatory governance can shape inclusive digital transformations.

6. Conclusions

Considering the preceding discussion, this section synthesizes the main theoretical and empirical insights derived from the case study. The analysis confirms and extends the existing literature on stakeholder engagement in urban digitalization strategies, reinforcing the criticality of structured, multi-actor involvement in the development of contextually appropriate and innovative digital solutions [41,43,45].

The case of the Consulta Roma Smart City Lab also shows that the active participation of citizens, businesses, universities, and public administrations is a strategic lever in shaping public digitization policies that are both legitimate and aligned with local needs [5]. Notably, this research, in line with previous studies [9,48], highlights that stakeholders (including citizens) are increasingly recognized not as passive recipients but as active actors in public policy.

However, it is important to acknowledge that stakeholder engagement within the RSCL remains predominantly mediated through representative forms rather than direct citizen involvement, which presents both advantages in terms of formal legitimacy and weaknesses related to inclusivity and representativeness. One of the principal strengths of this model is the explicit recognition and formalization of stakeholder participation, which enhances the contextual relevance and perceived legitimacy of digital initiatives.

This study also adds innovative elements. While many previous works focused on theoretical models of co-creation (such as Living Labs or open innovation platforms) the Rome model, through the Consulta system, offers a permanent institutional infrastructure with dual functions: as both a design laboratory and an advisory body. This arrangement formalizes participatory governance into a stable organizational asset, potentially ensuring both the longevity and adaptability of stakeholder engagement mechanisms [5,67].

This dual function is a major strength, as it embeds participatory processes deeply within administrative practices. The Consulta works through thematic groups whose proposals, once approved by the City Council, are included in the city’s strategic plans and financed accordingly. This procedural integration confirms the institutional relevance of the Consulta, transforming civic proposals into actionable policy instruments.

Additionally, the close collaboration between the RSCL and major industrial partners—including ENEA, Leonardo, and Microsoft—effectively translates theoretical frameworks such as the triple helix model (university–industry–government collaboration) and Smart City Platforms into practical, systemic innovations that are technologically advanced and socially responsive [7]. These collaborations enable the Consulta to take part in early stages of industrial planning, bringing citizens’ needs to the attention of companies and institutions.

Such collaborations bridge the gap between theoretical models and real-world practices, reinforcing both their practical utility and theoretical robustness.

Moreover, the ongoing institutionalization of bottom-up, co-design approaches provides evidence that it is possible to move beyond traditional top-down models, even within the Italian context. Early outputs demonstrate the tangible capacity of stakeholder engagement to not only inform strategy but to produce measurable, impactful outcomes for urban life. These first results mark a true shift, showing that the participatory governance framework can be an efficient operational mechanism embedded within city planning and implementation processes.

The experience of Rome suggests that inclusive governance mechanisms can enhance the legitimacy and relevance of smart city policies, especially when institutionalized within the municipal framework.

Although the RSCL represents a promising institutional framework for participatory governance, it remains at an early stage, with only a few projects fully implemented. Stakeholder engagement has been successfully formalized, yet participation is still largely mediated through representative organizations rather than direct citizen involvement, raising concerns about inclusivity and balanced representation. The absence of a fully operational digital platform for civic participation further limits direct engagement, though its future deployment may both expand opportunities and introduce new challenges related to accessibility and digital literacy.

In addition, the interviews highlighted the issue of overlap: indeed, certain projects had already been implemented or were in the process of being implemented, but due to a lack of coordinated information, this was not communicated to the Consulta. This issue needs to be addressed in order to prevent the duplication of efforts and ensure greater coherence in project execution.

From a policy perspective, several recommendations emerge. For the institutionalization of co-design, municipalities aiming to replicate the Roman experience should establish permanent participatory structures, rather than ad hoc consultations. Embedding such mechanisms in statutory and administrative frameworks ensures continuity across political cycles and facilitates accountability.

Then, to move beyond representative mediation, cities should invest in accessible, multilingual digital platforms that enable real-time interaction, participatory budgeting, and transparent feedback loops. This would broaden inclusion and mitigate inequalities linked to organizational capacity or digital literacy.

Another point to stress is the relevance of interdepartmental integration. Effective participatory governance requires horizontal coordination within the public administration. Shared digital infrastructures, interoperable databases, and cross-departmental planning units can prevent duplication, optimize resources, and align strategic objectives with community priorities.

Then, a point to highlight is capacity building and cultural change. The success of participatory digitalization depends on the skills and mindset of civil servants. Continuous training programs in data management, stakeholder facilitation, and ethical AI use are essential to embed co-creation into daily administrative routines.

Finally, multi-level and public–private partnerships are a key factor. The collaboration between the RSCL, Roma Technopole, and national research centers illustrates how the triple helix model can translate social needs into technological innovation. Similar partnerships should be incentivized through national and EU programs to ensure policy scalability.

In conclusion, the Roman model demonstrates that a smart city is not defined by technology alone but by the governance capacity to integrate diverse voices into decision-making. Institutionalizing stakeholder participation as a permanent feature of local governance represents both a democratic advancement and a strategic investment for resilient, inclusive, and sustainable urban digital transformation.

Overall, the RSCL provides a valuable model for integrating participatory governance into municipal structures, but its long-term effectiveness will depend on its capacity to evolve toward more inclusive, technologically accessible forms of participation. The Rome case thus offers a useful empirical reference for future comparative studies and policy experimentation in the field of smart, sustainable urban governance.