An Evaluation of the Relevance of Global Models of Indicators for Latin American Cities

  • Joe CarriónEmail author
  • Patricio Coba
  • Mario Pérez
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1066)


The local governments planning is the main tool to met the citizen needs. One of the components of this tool should include the outlines to take advantage of technology. But the people responsible to plan need specific metrics to measure how they are using the technology. This paper purpose an study of the relevance of the global indicators related to Cities with the best conditions to live or visit. We compared a set of models and the data of some indicators about Latin America cities and top cities around the world.

This research have analyzed a set of models provided by academy, industry and government and using a method deductive summarize the relevant indicators for Latinoamerica. We plan evaluate global models with a set of real dataset of some cities in order to create a model of indicators relevant to Latin America cities.


Indicators of sustainable development Smart city Models City ranking 


  1. 1.
    AENOR: Las normas para las ciudades inteligentes. Standard, Agencia Española de Normalizació, Espaa, Madrid (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Afonso, R.A., dos Santos Brito, K., do Nascimento, C.H., Garcia, V.C., Álvaro, A.: Brazilian smart cities: using a maturity model to measure and compare inequality in cities. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, dg.o 2015, pp. 230–238. ACM, New York (2015).,
  3. 3.
    Al-Nasrawi, S., Adams, C., El-Zaart, A.: A conceptual multidimensional model for assessing smart sustainable cities. JISTEM-J. Inf. Syst. Technol. Manag. 12(3), 541–558 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alkandari, A., Alnasheet, M., Alshekhly, I.F.T.: Smart cities: survey. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Technol. Res. 2, 79–90 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benamrou, B., Mohamed, B., Bernoussi, A.S., Mustapha, O.: Ranking models of smart cities. In: 2016 4th IEEE International Colloquium on Information Science and Technology (CiSt). pp. 872–879. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berrone, P., Ricart, J.E., Carraso, C., Ricart, R.: IESE cities in motion index 2016 (2016). Retrieved 1, 2017Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bosch, P., Jongeneel, S., Rovers, V., Neumann, H., Airaksinen, M., Huovila, A.: CITYkeys indicators for smart city projects and smart cities. CITYkeys report (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bruni, E., Panza, A., Sarto, L., Khayatian, F., et al.: Evaluation of cities smartness by means of indicators for small and medium cities and communities: a methodology for northern italy. Sustain. Cities Soc. 34, 193–202 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cohen, B.: Smart city wheel. Retrieved from Smart & Safe City (2013).
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    Dameri, R.P.: Searching for smart city definition: a comprehensive proposal. Int. J. Comput. Technol. 11(5), 2544–2551 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dameri, R.P.: The conceptual idea of smart city: University, industry, and government vision. In: Smart City Implementation, pp. 23–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giffinger, R., Gudrun, H.: Smart cities ranking: an effective instrument for the positioning of the cities? ACE: Architect. City Environ. 4(12), 7–26 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ISO: Sustainable development of communities – indicators for city services and quality of life. Standard, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, CH, May 2014Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smiciklas, J., Gundula Prokop, P.S.Z.S.: Collection Methodology for key Performance Indicators for Smart Sustainable Cities. Naciones Unidas, Nueva York: (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Khatoun, R., Zeadally, S.: Smart cities: concepts, architectures, research opportunities. Commun. ACM 59(8), 46–57 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, J.H., Hancock, M.G., Hu, M.C.: Towards an effective framework for building smart cities: Lessons from seoul and san francisco. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 89, 80–99 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nations, O.U.: World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision. Naciones Unidas, Nueva York (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paolo, N., De Marco, A., Cagliano, A.C, Mangano, G., Scorrano, F.: Current trends in smart city initiatives: some stylised facts. Cities (2013).
  20. 20.
    Penã, S., Osvaldo, O.: Smart city: Diagnóstico de la ciudad de guayaquil (ecuador) (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Prochazkova, D., Prochazka, J.: Safety of smart cities. Int. J. 15(8), 6979–6985 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    de Santana, E.D.S., de Oliveira Nunes, É., Passos, D.C., Santos, L.B.: SMM: a maturity model of smart cities based on sustainability indicators of the ISO 37122. Retrieved from Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Sci., 7 (2019)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Song, H., Srinivasan, R., Sookoor, T., Jeschke, S.: Smart Cities: Foundations, Principles, and Applications. Wiley, Hoboken (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidad IsraelQuitoEcuador

Personalised recommendations