The Complexity of Governing Smart Cities—An Integrated Approach

  • Geetha A. Rubasundram
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation book series (ASTI)


Smart Cities are emerging as a strategy to manage the problems generated by urban population growth and rapid urbanization. The push for sustainable growth via the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), as well as the motivation of companies to adopt the Integrated Reporting (IR) framework (which also echoes sustainable value creation) interlinks the collaborative governance relationship between global institutions, countries, government, businesses and the public. The comparison of smart governance or e-governance, to the traditional concept of good governance is relevant to ensure consistency of goals and motivations, across all levels of stakeholders. This study initially identified firms recognized for their financial reporting, as a proxy for firm level good governance, which were then grouped into the top five countries based on frequency. The countries identified were UK (17%), Sweden (12%), Germany (11%), Japan (11%) and France (8%). All five countries are developed nations and are members of the OECD and UN. The results suggest an interesting “East meets West” perspective, with each of the countries reflecting different cultural values that motivate the route to good governance. The five countries were initially measured using the traditional measures of good governance and culture, and subsequently compared to e-governance and e-participation indexes. Data for this research have been extracted from reliable sources such as the World Bank, United Nations, Transparency International, World Justice Project and OECD. The research reports inconsistent results when using different basis of assessments, which indicates the lack of integration across goals and methods, differing between platform and the genuine intent to participate or to allow participation.


Culture e-governance e-participation Good governance Sustainable development goals 


  1. 1.
    United Nations E-Government Survey 2016, E-Government in Support of Sustainable Development. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations New York (2016). Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  2. 2.
    Rodriguez Bolivar, M.P: Transforming City Governments for Successful Smart Cities. Public Administration and Information Technology 8, Springer International Publishing Switzerland (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thomas, M.A: What do worldwide governance indicators measure? Eur J. Dev. Res. 22(1), 31–54 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    United Nations Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development A/RES/70/1. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  5. 5.
    Kroll, C.: Sustainable Development Goals—Are the Rich Countries Ready? Bertelsmann Stiftung September 2015 with the support of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Arnaboldi, M., Spiller, N.: Actor—network theory and stakeholder collaboration: the case of cultural districts. Tour. Manage. 32, 641–654 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tuan, L.T.: From corporate governance to balanced performance measurement. Knowl. Manage. Res. Pract. 2014(12), 12–28 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhao, F., Shen, K.N., Collier, A.: Effects of national culture on e-government diffusion—a global study of 55 countries. Inf. Manage. (2014). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van Kersbergen, K., Van Waarden, F.: Governance as a bridge between disciplines: cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 43,143–171 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    North, D.C: Institutions. J. Econ. Perspect. 5(1), pp 97–112 (1991) (Winter)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    North, D.C: Economic performance through time. Am. Econ. Rev. 84(3), 359–68 (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rasiah, R.: The role of institutions and linkages in learning and innovation. Int. J. Institutions Econ. 3(2), pp 165–172 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    IIRC Integrated Reporting. In The International Integrated Reporting Council. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  14. 14.
    Licht, A.N., Goldschmidt, C., Schwartz, S.H: Culture rules: the foundations of the rule of law and other norms of governance. J. Comp. Econ. 35 659–688 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roland, G.: Understanding Institutional Change: Fast-Moving and Slow-Moving Institutions. Studies in Comparative International Development (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    BIS Smart Cities: Background Paper, Department of Business Innovation and Skills. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  17. 17.
    World Bank: Governance, The World Banks Experience. World Bank, Washington DC (1994)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nam, T., Pardo, T.A: Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people and institutions. In: The Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research. Last accessed 9 Sept 2017
  19. 19.
    Manville, C. et al.: Mapping Smart Cities in the EU, Directorate General for Internal Policies, Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy. European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (Available from Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  20. 20.
    Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., Mastruzzi, M.: The worldwide governance indicators: a summary of methodology, data and analytical issues. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5430 (2010) Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  21. 21.
    Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2016. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  22. 22.
    WJP: Rule of Law Index 2016, World Justice Project. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  23. 23.
    Sustainable Governance Indicators SGI. Bertelsmann Siftung. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  24. 24.
    Hofstede, G.H: Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organisations Across Nations. sec ed Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA (2001)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hofstede, G.H.: Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values. CA, Sage, Thousand Oaks (1980)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  27. 27.
    Granier, B., Kudo, H.: How are citizens involved in smart cities? Analyzing citizen participation in Japanese “Smart Communities”. Inf. Polity 21, 61–76 (2016). Scholar
  28. 28.
    DeWit, A.: Japan’s rollout of smart cities: what role for the citizens? Asia Pacific J. 11(24) (Number 2) (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vrabie, C.I., Tirziu, A.M.: E-participation—a key factor in developing smart cities. In: EIRP Proceedings, vol. 11. The European Citizen and Public Administration (2016)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tessmann, J., Kirchner, I.: The Participation of Citizens in German Local Government. City Mayors. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017
  31. 31.
    Berlin Senate Department, Smart City Strategy Berlin, Senate Department for Urban Development and the Environment Berlin. Last accessed 21 Sept 2017

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Asia Pacific UniversityKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.University of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations