With people in the center, the session aimed to put together the pieces of the puzzle that the digitized city appears to be for many of us. What are the driving forces and the prospects of the digital transformation? Can we measure it? Are zero emission neighbourhoods possible in smart cities? What is the role of public, cooperative and social housing providers in making the link with other services for their residents? How does a living lab look like?
adam greenfield against the smart city pdf free
Download: https://urllio.com/2vFbtL
At present modern cities are multilevel systems in which inhabitants interact with each other and with city environment elements, using the smart technologies with various degrees of intensity. Besides, the development of many Russian cities is associated with the smart city concept's active introduction. Its effective implementation is impossible without citizens' participation and their awareness and perception of existing smart technologies in the city. There is a lack of reviews concerning the perception of smart technology in Russia. This topic's study is relevant because of the active implementation of this concept into Russian cities' practice. This study aims to analyze smart cities' concept by citizens of the Tyumen region, evaluate smart technologies' perception, and demonstrate their positive and negative perception of them. The article presents various approaches to studying the concept of smart city and its elements in the scientific literature and the role of citizen participation in it. During the research, the questionnaire was developed and used for the citizens of the Tyumen Region. A questionnaire results of three cities of the Tyumen region related to their perception of smart technologies introduced in cities were analyzed. The received results showed that the existing concept of a smart city in the Tyumen region was focused on the Information and communication technology component, smart infrastructure. However, it was developed without considering the needs of the citizens and did not contribute to the improvement of the quality of their life. Keywords:
In recent decades, the smart city concept remains one of the most popular concepts of urban development. The popularity of the concept is explained by city authorities' intention to solve the significant problems of urbanization related to the implementation of the smart city concept. However, after two decades, there is no unified definition of a smart city and approaches to smart city projects.
The number of scientific researches concerning smart cities significantly growing. Nowadays there are different approaches and perceptions of the concept of a smart city. But there is no commonly agreed definition of smart cities (Yigitcanlar et al., 2018).
The theoretical and methodological fundamentals of the research are based on results of scientists which are devoted to the theory and practice of creating a smart city. Among the most significant works are the studies in which the profound semantic analysis is presented (Cocchia, 2014) and different definitions of smart city are given (Albino et al., 2015; Eremia et al., 2017; Mora et al., 2017; Trindade et al., 2017). The great attention is paid to the work of Joss where the webometric analysis of the publications regarding the elements of smart city concept as well as the scientific researches which criticize it are pointed out (Joss et al., 2019).
In 1990s smart cities are considered to be the cities using ICT to increase intellectuality, interaction and efficiency of important components of city infrastructure and services, including governance, education, health, public security/ safety, transport, real estate and housing and utilities services (Cocchia, 2014). Today, smart city projects seemed to pay more attention to provide economic development and quality of living outcomes using modern technologies' capabilities - perhaps as, in the short run, these are more profitable and relatively easier tasks to deliver (Hollands, 2015). In other words, during the last decade, the smart city concept became a buzz word predominantly for technocentric urbanisation with recognition of flexible and mobile means of production and innovation.
The issues concerning the role of citizens and their participation in smart city projects realization are often arisen in scientific discussions in early 2013. There are many researches devoted to the role of citizens participation in smart city projects and their perception of modern different technologies implementing in these cities (Cowley et al., 2018; Degbelo et al., 2016; Marsal-Llacuna, 2017; Woetzel & Kuznetsova, 2018).
The investigations of other scientists demonstrate the citizen unwillingness of interacting with this ubiquitous technology (Hollands, 2015; Suopajärvi, 2017). Some studies are based on the analysis of the expert opinion of city managers who have developed and realized the smart city concept (Alawadhi et al., 2012; Valdez et al., 2018). But nowadays modern researches regarding smart city are critical (Griffiths, 2020; Routray et al., 2019). More often social inequality which is appeared in smart cities at the expense of elements of smart city concept implementation is discussed. Townsend and Kitchin highlight the ethical problems of ubiquitous smart city technologies (Kitchin, 2016; Townsend, 2013). Rivera et al. (2015) analyze the danger of the human essence loss due to widespread ICT implementation.
Smart city projects, nonetheless, are big and expensive capital investments - supposed to drive societal and environmental transformations, thus very hard to properly deliver (Yigitcanlar et al., 2018). To realize this project successfully it is necessary to take into account the role of citizens and their perception of smart city conception.
Many studies on smart cities focus primarily on technological aspects. Investments and efforts by city administrations indeed remain important factors in the successful implementation of technologies, but many of them have only an indirect or negligible impact on the lives and behaviour of citizens. The ordinary citizen often does not notice any influence of smart technologies on his everyday life because they do not require his direct participation in them. This does not negate the importance of such solutions for a city, because they allow city authorities and residents to save money, time, and energy. At the same time, the success of implementing the smart city concept will depend on the level of awareness and perception of these technologies by citizens, as well as on the level of their civic activity.
The purpose of the work is to study the perception of a smart city's concept by citizens of Tyumen region, their assessment of both positive and negative effects on the introduction of smart city technologies.
The respondent perception of smart technologies was assessed during the study using the following questions "Which of the smart city technologies listed in the table are there in your city?, Which of the smart city technologies do you use and do you have some benefit from them? A list of 26 the most updated technologies of smart city was presented for the assessment. To assess the results of the survey concerning the use of the smart city technologies the following answers were offered to answer the question: This technology is not available in our city, This technology is available in our city, but I don't use it, I use this technology but I don't have any benefit from it, I use this technology and it makes life easier, I don't know about this technology. To make the analysis much more convenient and presentative the results of answers versions such as This is not available in the city and I don't know were transformed into the answer I am not informed about the existence of this technology in our city.
Respondents were offered to rank smart city technologies according to their influence on life using a scale from 1 to 5 scores (1 score demonstrates a negative influence and 5 score shows a positive one).
Tobolsk citizen perception considerably differs from one of Tyumen respondents. It is related to a small number of technologies in this city. 70% of respondents in Tobolsk showed a lack of information concerning 14 smart technologies of 26. About 30% of these respondents demonstrated unawareness of 5 technologies of 26.
The most common technologies which are used by Tobolsk citizen are the following such as electronic register for school children, an electronic register in educational institutions, a unified patient's medical card, city sites and mobile applications for doctor appointments, official sites and pages of the city in social media sites, city online stores, the possibility of non-cash payments in public transport. Thus, as in Tyumen, the list of smart technologies in Tobolsk includes mainly those related to everyday urban life and social services, but it should be noted that the list of technologies to which Tobolsk residents are adapted is somewhat smaller.
Residents of Tobolsk consider that the most useful smart city technologies are city sites and mobile apps for doctor appointments, e-services and the possibility of non-cash payments in city transport. At least half of the respondents. However, as many as half of the respondents indicated that they use these technologies, it makes their lives easier. Tobolsk residents, as well as Tyumen residents, rarely pointed out the uselessness of smart technologies, but every fifth of considers city sites and city social media pages useless.
The residents of Khanty-Mansiysk suppose that they have the greatest of using official city sites, mobile applications for doctor appointments, the e-governance services, as well as online stores and delivery services. All of these services make their life much more comfortable. As for the residents of Khanty-Mansiysk they rarely noted the uselessness of applying smart technologies as compared to the residents of other cities. But 16% of surveyed residents in Khanty-Mansiysk considered the separate garbage collection to be useless (11% in Tyumen and Tobolsk). In the case of Tobolsk residents, 31 percent of respondents gave average estimates and the proportion of positive evaluations was also noticeably higher than the proportion of negative evaluations - 47 percent as against 21 percent (1 percent difficult to answer). It should be noted that the proportion of negative efficiency ratings is higher in Tobolsk than in Tyumen, which is likely to be due to the fact that technology is less widely adopted in the city and more mistrustful of its inhabitants. Khanty-Mansiysk residents' estimates were closer to those of Tobolsk residents: a positive-negative ratio of 47% to 17%, average score of 35 percent (1 percent of respondents having difficulty answering). 2ff7e9595c
Comments