This chapter provides a framework to conceptualize a few common topics related to smart city governance. It provides a high-level overview of smart cities movement in Asian countries, followed by the various mechanics and concepts of smart cities to demonstrate that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to create smart cities. It will then highlight several common concerns and challenges relating to smart city governance, which include privacy, security, and public–private partnerships.
According to the World Bank, cities are home to roughly 55% of the world’s population and account for more than 80% of its Gross Domestic Product (2020). It is projected that by 2030, about “752 million people will live in cities with at least 10 million inhabitants” (United Nations 2017, p. 3). Cities are therefore not only of central importance to the economy, but also have a critical impact on the environmental, political, and social lives of the individuals who inhabit them (World Bank 2020). Realizing the potential to improve people’s lives along these axes, governments around the world have, for the last couple of decades, been looking to leverage various “smart city” initiatives to meet these goals. (IMD World Competitiveness 2020; People’s Republic of China, nd).
Smart city initiatives are diverse and span across various industries. These initiatives can include opportunities to increase food security with urban community farming. Cities can target climate change through the implementation of smart mobility and smart grids, expansion of green spaces, and through the creation of 15-min city neighbourhoods. Smart city initiatives can also aim to increase access to services for citizens and civic participation (UN Economist Network 2020, pp. 12, 89). In addition to helping municipalities, provinces, and states benefit citizens, it has been suggested that smart cities can help countries work toward achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Alisjahbana 2019). Smart cities have been identified as an opportunity to work toward attaining SDG 11, making “cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable” (IISD 2018) in addition to contributing to other SDGs.Footnote 1
Smart city governance is a vast topic that encompasses numerous facets and elements. Given that in many cases, technology has been seen as the main enabler of smart city development, policymakers have been grappling with issues around governance within this environment (UN Report 2020, p. 89). While there are practical reasons for governments and citizens to encourage the development of smart cities, there are also regulatory, legal, policy, and ethical challenges that may limit these benefits or prevent them from being realized at all. (World Economic Forum 2020).Footnote 2 Recognizing the opportunities to leverage smart city initiatives, stakeholders have been keen to help smart cities realize their fullest potential while navigating these challenges (World Economic Forum 2019).Footnote 3 One such initiative is the G20 Global Smart Cities Alliance, which aims to “lead a new global effort to establish universal norms and guidelines for implementation of smart city technology” and to create a roadmap for cities to leverage policy and regulatory toolboxes for smart cities (World Economic Forum 2019).
It is difficult to know how many smart cities currently exist or are in development, as there are initiatives stemming across all continents (IMDWCC 2020). The earliest examples of smart cities have been said to include those in Europe, including Amsterdam and Barcelona. However, there has also been an increase in the growth and planning of smart cities in Asia. The key focus of this special series is smart cities in Asian countries, and while specific examples will be discussed throughout, many of the concepts, contentions, and challenges are universal and can apply to smart city initiatives across the world.
Given the vastness of this topic, this introductory note will provide an overview of the importance, approaches, and governance challenges associated with smart cities for the purpose of setting the stage for the chapters that follow. It is meant to provide a framework to conceptualize some of the issues and topics related to smart cities’ governance. Part 2 provides a brief overview of the uptake of smart cities across Asian countries. Part 3 describes the various approaches in defining smart cities, developing them, and qualifying them to demonstrate that development and governance are not a one-size-fits-all approach (van Eerd 2020). Part 4 will then illustrate several common considerations and challenges relating to smart city governance, which include privacy, security, and public–private partnerships.
2.2 Adoption of Smart Cities: Focus on Asia
Smart cities play a significant role in Asia, as urbanization continues to increase rapidly. According to UN Habitat’s World Cities Report 2020, it is estimated that, “[n]inety-six per cent of urban growth will occur in the less developed regions of East Asia, South Asia and Africa with three countries—India, China and Nigeria—accounting for 35 per cent of the total increase in global urban population from 2018 to 2050” (2020, p. 11). It is expected that during this time, India and China will increase by 416 and 255 million people respectively (UN Habitat 2020, p. 11) and that in China, there will be “221 cities with more than 1 million inhabitants” by 2025 (van Eerd 2020, p. 14).
Based on this anticipated increase and growth, it is unsurprising that smart cities are being embraced as a strategic opportunity for countries in this region. (Ludher et al. 2018).Footnote 4 New cities in China, India, and Korea are already being developed with networks that “interweave electricity, water, waste and gas systems,” enhancing data generation and collection, which in turn helps monitor resources (OECD 2020a, b, p. 14). In 2020 it was revealed that there were over 500 smart cities being developed in China alone (Chandran 2020).
The Organisation for Economic Coordination and Development (OECD) reported that countries across Asia have developed their own “smart city strategy” (van Eerd 2020, p. 14). This is important to note, because it has been suggested that until now, much of the literature and research about smart city initiatives have been conducted through the lens of Western narratives, where there is greater participation by citizens and local governments. In the context of Asia, national governments play an important role and can often be seen as “the main actor, actively promoting and planning smart cities in many cases” (Joo and Tan 2020, p. 6). This can be seen in several jurisdictions such as in China (People’s Republic of China 2016), Korea (Hwang 2020, p. 86), and Japan (Yarime 2020).
In the context of emerging Asian cities (Matsumoto et al. 2019, p. 4),Footnote 5 reportedly six out of 12 countries, including China, Singapore, and Thailand, have a national level smart city strategy (Matsumoto et al. 2019, p. 4). While engagement at the national level is positive as it signals commitment, collaboration and partnerships with regional and local governments is not always clear (Matsumoto et al. 2019, p. 8). This lack of clarity can lead to uncertainty in issues of governance and application. The following two sections will describe some of the common challenges related to developing, defining, and governing smart cities.
2.3 What Are Smart Cities? Defining Features
Defining smart cities is a useful exercise as it provides a starting point to conceptualize the various parameters of the term and to measure success. Despite smart cities being a widely used concept,Footnote 6 “smart” or “intelligent” cities have been defined in many ways. As highlighted by the United Nations Economic and Social Council in 2016, “[t]here is no standardized commonly accepted definition or set of terminologies for a smart city” (United Nations Economic and Social Council 2016, p. 3).
In 2020, the OECD defined smart cities as “initiatives or approaches that effectively leverage digitalisation to boost citizen well-being and deliver more efficient, sustainable and inclusive urban services and environments as part of a collaborative, multi-stakeholder process” (“Smart cities and inclusive growth” 2020, p. 8). Prior to this definition, in 2016 the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) developed a definition that highlighted similar themes: “[a] smart sustainable city is an innovative city that uses ICTs and other means to improve quality of life, efficiency of urban operation and services, and competitiveness, while ensuring that it meets the needs of present and future generations with respect to economic, social, environmental as well as cultural aspects” (2015, p. 3); United Nations Economic and Social Council (2016, p. 3).
In addition to these definitions, there are various qualifiers or “conceptual cousins” that have been used in the literature to further distinguish the goals or ambitions related to smart cities (Nam and Pardo 2011, p. 282). For example, smart cities have been qualified as “sustainable” (UNECE 2021) “ethical,” (Global Smart Cities Alliance 2021) or “people-centered” (UN Habitat 2021) and can also be qualified as “digital,” “intelligent,” or “humane” cities (Nam and Pardo 2011, p. 284). Nam and Pardo categorize these concepts into three main dimensions of “technology, people, and institutions”–noting that they are all “core factors” and “key conceptual components” of smart cities (2011, pp. 284–285). These factors seem to exist in all smart cities in varying degrees, depending on the city (Nam and Pardo 2011, pp. 286–287). The general goals of smart cities are efficiency, inclusivity, and economic and sustainable growth, with a focus on helping improve the quality and well-being of its inhabitants’ lives (UN Report 2020, p. 12). Two of the three factors, technology and institutional, will be highlighted briefly as they are directly related to the considerations discussed in the following section (Nam and Pardo 2011, p. 285).Footnote 7
Technology can be seen as an enabler of the outcomes that smart city initiatives attempt to achieve. (Fleming 2020).Footnote 8 Smart city enabling technologies rely on the collection and use of data from numerous devices, Internet of Things (IoT), and sensors. Additionally, there is an ever-growing array of technologies that may greatly contribute to this environment–these include artificial intelligence (European Commission 2020), 5G networks (Huang 2021), blockchain (Hori 2021), and quantum computing technologies. (Shipilov 2019). These technologies are often developed and operated by private sector third party organizations.Footnote 9
Various technologies can be implemented to enhance access to government services (e.g., digital identification, health) (Thales Group 2020), improve efficiencies (e.g., electricity, water management, traffic), help reduce impact on the environment (Carter and Boukerche 2020), and provide accessibility to transportation systems by reducing traffic and encouraging alternative mobility (OECD 2020a). There are several categories of smart city technologies, including “transportation,” “water and electricity,” “environmental monitoring,” and “infrastructure and architecture” (Landry et al. 2018).
Smart cities rely on strategic vision and governance, in other words, the institutional factor. (Nam and Pardo 2011, pp. 286–287) As Nam and Pardo describe it, this factor considers how various communities and actors align to design and develop their smart city ambitions, and governance (2011, pp. 286–287). Smart cities can emerge in various ways. Conceptually, they can be top-down, bottom-up, or mixed. Top-down cities are those that are heavily planned and controlled. The vision of this smart city is one where everything is connected and managed through the “control room” (Breuer et al. 2014, p. 156). The top-down city is built from the ground up with all things designed and planned (Breuer et al. 2014, p. 156; Centre for Smart Cities, nd), where the emphasis is on driving and enhancing efficiencies and having a city run like clockwork. The bottom-up city relies on citizen engagement (Breuer et al. 2014, p. 157). Organic engagement and participation by individuals, local businesses, and communities are key. There are also variations of mixed initiatives, layers, and elements of smart cities that don’t necessarily fall under either category (Capdevila and Zarlenga 2015).
The institutional dimension also covers public–private–people partnerships between one or several levels of government, the private sector, and individuals (Nam and Pardo 2011, pp. 286–287). Partnerships can contribute to the challenges that cities face when trying to adopt new “processes, practices and approaches” (OECD “Enhancing the contribution of smart cities” 2019, p. 21). Leveraging the private sector, for example, could be extremely beneficial for service delivery and access. The role or governance of partnerships will be discussed in the next section.
2.4 Smart City Technology Governance: Highlighting Challenges
The last decade has brought a significant shift in the way policymakers have been grappling with smart city governance. Organizations and policymakers have recognized and acknowledged the fact that emerging technology and its potential impacts have outpaced the regulatory frameworks that exist to protect individuals who interact with these technologies. This awareness was heightened as data—the foundational requirement for many technology-based smart city solutions—was declared the “new oil” in 2017 (Economist 2017).
Despite the various concepts or types of smart cities, for example, “sustainable” (UNECE 2021), “ethical” (Global Smart Cities Alliance, nd), or “people-centered” (UN Habitat, nd), there are cross-cutting challenges, especially as governments around the world are coming to terms with the far-reaching societal and ethical impacts of data and emerging technologies. In 2019, the World Economic Forum announced that it had been selected to lead a global forum to “establish universal norms and guidelines for implementation of smart city technology” in collaboration with the G20 presidency. At the time of writing this note, the “global policy roadmap” had developed “good practice” on several of the identified considerations, including information and communications technology (ICT) accessibility, open data, privacy impact assessment, and the cyber accountability model (World Economic Forum 2019). In the same year, 36 cities from around the world were selected as the inaugural participants in this program including selections in India, South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines (World Economic Forum 2020).
How these challenges are practically addressed will vary based on the jurisdiction and, as a result, the regulatory frameworks present within those jurisdictions. For example, in the context of data collection and use, what might be deemed appropriate based on the regulatory framework in one jurisdiction will be vastly different in another (e.g., the General Data Protection RegulationFootnote 10 versus other jurisdictions). For this reason, the examples provided in this section are general and are meant to illustrate the universal considerations associated with smart cities. Even where they do not breach laws or regulations within the jurisdiction they occur, the possible outcome, that is the potential harm or impact on an individual, remains the same.
In the context of smart cities, technology-enabled solutions rely on the collection and use of vast amounts of data, including personal data, from numerous sources. These can include the collection and use of biometric, behavioral, and other types of information from IoT connected devices such as sensors, meters, and cellphones. How this data is used and for what purpose is an important question. As we rely more heavily on artificial intelligence and automation, there are additional risks of harm in some contexts.
Public trust is central to uptake and to civic participation. As pointed out by the OECD, in addition to considering governance issues related to competition and the economy, the “shift from an economy of infrastructure to an economy of applications will only work if data is perceived as being in safe hands” (OECD 2020b, p. 45). The TraceTogether contact tracing app, developed (Singapore Government Developer Portal 2021) and launched by the government of Singapore, while not a direct example of a smart city technology, received backlash as the government revealed that the information they confirmed would be collected for the purpose of contact tracing, could also be used in criminal and other inquiries (Illmer 2021). The public reaction prompted new legislation to be tabled in parliament (Yi-Ling and Abdul Rahman 2021).
The use of facial recognition and surveillance technology is also a legitimate concern as the extent and impact of the information being collected and used is often unknown to the individual. In 2019, TechCrunch revealed that a database containing data including “facial recognition scans on hundreds of people over several months” was accessed on a web browser that was not password secured (Whittaker 2021). The information revealed the movement of a subsection of individuals residing in a neighborhood including “where people went, when and for how long, allowing anyone with access to the data—including police—to build up a picture of a person’s day-to-day life” (Whittaker 2021).While there may be regulatory implications for the ubiquitous collection and use of data in some jurisdictions, there are also interesting ethical considerations, including profiling.
Some jurisdictions are looking at creative opportunities to overcome concerns about privacy and consent The city of Aizuwakamatsu in Japan, adopted an “opt-in” approach for smartphone disaster alerts and various digital services in “mobility, education, healthcare, and energy consumption” which provides citizens with some level of control over the use of their data (Chandran 2021).
Security is a particularly interesting aspect of smart cities because the potential vulnerabilities do not apply only to individuals, but also to infrastructures and services (Kitchin 2019; Muggah and Goodman 2019). For example, in 2018, it was reported that IBM and Threatcare identified 17 vulnerabilities in smart cities around the world, which would have impacted traffic light and flood warning systems (Ng 2018). There are a wide range of actors who might benefit from breaching or disrupting cities. These may include state actors, organized crime, terrorist groups, individuals, or businesses (CPAC 2019, p. 11). There is also the possibility of (information technology and IoT) systems being vulnerable to disasters (CPAC 2019, p. 11).
In 2021, the United Kingdom’s National Cyber Security Centre issued guidance, suggesting that smart cities, due to the need to collect, process, and store sensitive data, could be “an attractive target for a range of threat actors” (Corera 2021; National Cyber Security Centre 2021). The Government of Canada also noted the potential threat to the safety of Canadians because of connected smart devices and smart cities (Communications Security Establishment 2020, p. 12). Additionally, it was reported that in the United States, “a quarter of local governments were facing attempted cyberattacks every hour” in 2016 (G20 Global Cities Alliance; Pandey et al. 2020).
The challenges with security stem from various issues. One of these issues is that given many cities have legacy systems intermixed with new applications, the level of security might not be standard across the board (Nussbaum 2016). Another security issue is the sheer number of sensors and connected devices gathering information for difference purposes. For example, a single neighborhood could collect data about energy, electricity and hydro, traffic, cars, front doors, and mobile devices. The implications of geographically concentrated information gathering can be far-reaching for individuals and systems (Nussbaum 2016).
2.4.3 Private–Public Partnership
Smart cities rely heavily on public–private partnerships (including partnerships with universities and non-governmental organizations) (McKinsey Global Institute 2019) across various industries, including telecommunications, energy, digital health, and agriculture. In 2019, the OECD highlighted the fact that the private sector has played a significant role as “advocate, investor and gamechanger in the use of technologies to define and address a range of problems in selected sectors; it is now confronted with the challenge of considering new forms of public–private collaborations to facilitate the uptake of these initiatives in the face of megatrends, regulatory change and infrastructure needs” (OECD 2019, p. 11).
In 2017, the World Economic Forum highlighted the benefits of private sector involvement in urban development and transformation, including the advantages of investment, innovation, management, and risk management (World Economic Forum 2017, p. 26) in the context of the UN New Urban Agenda, stating that, “a concise, focused, forward-looking and action-oriented plan … provides a new global strategy on urbanization for the next two decades” (World Economic Forum 2017, p. 6). There are numerous examples of public–private partnerships across smart cities in Asia. For example, Alibaba developed an intelligence system called ET City Brain and deployed it across 23 Asian cities (Alibaba Clouder 2019). ET City Brain has contributed to vast improvements in various areas. For example, in Hangzhou this program has assisted in traffic reduction, the purchase of parking passes, and vehicle licensing, and even checking into hotels (Alibaba Clouder 2019).
In 2019, Japan created a “Smart City Public–Private Partnership Platform” where over 100 cities and 300 companies have signed up to promote “knowledge exchange, business matching, and closer ties between public, private and academia” (Japan BrandVoice 2019). Furthermore, at the national level, Japan enacted a law in 2020 to “improve the collaboration between the public and private sectors for the digital transformation of cities” (Hirayama and Rama 2021), while at the local level, cities have been driving collaboration with the private sector to enhance digital transformation and data sharing (Hirayama and Rama 2021).
As stated by the OECD,
shifting from a government-led approach to public–private collaboration is an important priority. Smart city projects can only be successful if they engage a variety of stakeholders, such as technology developers and service providers (who make technology); city developers (who add technology); city administrators (who use technology); residents and local companies (who purchase technology). (van Eerd 2020, p. 9)
Despite the benefits, important challenges can arise from these partnerships. These challenges relate to data governance and questions of “ownership” (Scassa 2020). They can also relate to privacy and security. Teresa Scassa highlights the complexity of smart city data governance given the various actors and sources,
Public sector access to information and protection of privacy legislation provides some sort of framework for transparency and privacy when it comes to public sector data, but clearly such legislation is not well adapted to the diversity of smart cities data. While some data will be clearly owned and controlled by the municipality, other data will not be. Further the increasingly complex relationship between public and private sectors around input data and data analytics means that there will be a growing number of conflicts between rights of access and transparency on the one hand, and the protection of confidential commercial information on the other. (Scassa 2018)
As she points out, there can be important differences between the regulatory requirements and the objectives of the private and public sectors. These differences can result in an erosion of trust between the public and government efforts to encourage adoption and processes. The importance of partnerships cannot be overstated, as there are clear boundaries in the capacity of governments to fulfill the mandate of smart cities on their own.
Asian cities are poised to be impacted by high urban growth in upcoming decades. Given the potential density in urban areas, governments are looking ahead to develop smart cities to alleviate congestion and pollution, reduce the impact of climate change, and enhance civic engagement and mobility.
Smart cities do not follow a one-size-fits-all approach: no two smart cities are alike. They are a product of many considerations, including whether they are a result of a national or regional strategy, the objectives they are attempting to achieve, and the regulatory and social framework within which they operate. They are also the product of the degree to which levers of institutional, technology, and human factors are at play. Despite the differences between smart cities, they share several commonalities related to challenges and risks related to privacy, security, and public–private partnerships. In addition to questions of governance, public–private partnerships can play an important role in shaping the public’s uptake of trust in the adoption and acceptance of smart city initiatives.
The 2015 Resolution A/RES/70/1 Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted by the General Assembly with the aim of motivating member states to work together to achieve common goals towards a path of sustainable growth. The three underlying dimensions of the 17 goals are economic, social, and environmental. See https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.
In order to address the regulatory and policy framework, a roadmap is being developed to help participant cities navigate issues including “privacy protection, better broadband coverage, accountability for cyber security, increased openness of city data, and better accessibility to digital city services for disabled and elderly people”.
For example, in 2019, the World Economic Forum announced that it was going to lead the G20 Smart Cities Alliance on Technology.
For example, recognizing the opportunities for collaboration, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations established their Smart Cities Network (ASCN) in 2018 and developed a smart city framework to help “sustainable urbanisation” to improve lives.
This includes Southeast Asia, China, and India.
For example, the report of the United Nations Economic and Social Council, “The UNECE-ITU Smart Sustainable Cities Indicators” Committee on Housing and Land Management Seventy-Sixth session 2015 ECE/HBP/2015/4 at 2 stated that as far back as 2012, the UNECE Committee on Housing and Land Management had identified “sustainable smart cities” as one of its priorities.
Finally, the human or people factor, perhaps the most important, centers on improving the lives of those who inhabit the smart city. As Nam and Pardo suggest, “[s]ocial infrastructure (intellectual capital and social capital) is indispensable endowment to smart cities”.
It is important to note that there are also low or non-technological solutions that can contribute to facilitating these outcomes; however, the risks associated with these will not be covered in this overview.
More discussion about private–public partnerships below.
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC.
Alibaba Clouder (2019) City brain now in 23 cities in Asia. Available via Alibaba Cloud. https://www.alibabacloud.com/blog/city-brain-now-in-23-cities-in-asia_595479?spm=a2c65.11461422.214.171.124b93185aJbxquz. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Alisjahbana AS (2019) Smart cities hold the key to sustainable development. United Nations, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Available via UN ESCAP. https://www.unescap.org/op-ed/smart-cities-hold-key-sustainable-development. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
Breuer J et al (2014) Beyond defining the smart city: meeting top-down and bottom-up approaches in the middle. In: Journal of land use, mobility and environment special issue eight international conference input: smart city—planning for energy, transportation and sustainability of the urban system, 2–4 June 2014
Capdevila I, Zarlenga MI (2015) Smart city of smart citizens? The Barcelona case. J Strat Manage 8(3):266. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-03-2015-0030/full/html.
Carter L, Boukerche S (2020) Catalyzing private sector investment in climate-smart cities. Invest4Climate knowledge series. Available via World Bank https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/179101596519553908/pdf/Catalyzing-Private-Sector-Investment-in-Climate-Smart-Cities.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Centre for Cities (2014) What is a smart city: a concept lost in translation? Available via Centre for Cities. https://www.centreforcities.org/reader/smart-cities/what-is-a-smart-city/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Chandran R (2020) Tencent’s ‘smart city’ seen as model for post-coronavirus China. Available via Thomson Reuters Foundation News. https://news.trust.org/item/20200624080235-95zxs as cited in Bacchi U (2020) ‘I know your favourite drink’: Chinese smart city to put AI in charge. Available via World Economic Forum https://www.orum.org/agenda/2020/12/china-ai-technology-city/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Chandran R (2021) How Japan’s ‘opt-in’ smart city could change urban living. Available via World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/03/japanese-smart-city-residents-privacy-protection-data/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Communications Security Establishment (2020) Canadian Centre for Cyber Security: National Cyber Threat Assessment 2020. Available via Communications Security Establishment https://cyber.gc.ca/sites/default/files/publications/ncta-2020-e-web.pdf
Corera G (2021) Spy bosses warn of cyber-attacks on smart cities. Available via BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57012725. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Cybersecurity and Privacy Advisory Committee (CPAC) (2019) Smart and secure cities and communities challenge (SC3): a risk management approach to smart city cybersecurity and privacy. Available via CPAC. https://pages.nist.gov/GCTC/uploads/blueprints/2019_GCTC-SC3_Cybersecurity_and_Privacy_Advisory_Committee_Guidebook_July_2019.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Economist (2017) The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data. Available via The Economist. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2017/05/06/the-worlds-most-valuable-resource-is-no-longer-oil-but-data. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
European Commission (2020) DIH webinar: artificial intelligence for smart cities. Available via European Commission. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/dih-webinar-artificial-intelligence-smart-cities. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
European Commission, Regulation (EU) (2016) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)
Fleming A (2020) The case for …making low-tech ‘dumb’ cities instead of ‘smart’ ones. Available via The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2020/jan/15/the-case-for-making-low-tech-dumb-cities-instead-of-smart-ones. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Global Smart Cities Alliance (2021) Global policy roadmap. Available via G20 Global Smart Cities Alliances https://globalsmartcitiesalliance.org/?page_id=90. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Hirayama Y, Rama R (2021) Japan’s smart city initiatives will play key role in its digitisation and economic revival. Available via World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/04/japan-smart-city-initiatives-digitisation-economic-revival-gtgs/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Hori S (2021) How blockchain can empower smart cities—and why interoperability will be crucial. Available via World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/04/how-blockchain-can-empower-smart-cities-gtgs21/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Huang M (2021) Making smart cities: the power of hackathons brings together Rogers, UBC students, city of Kelowna, and Microsoft to advance 5G smart city applications. Available via Microsoft. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/garage/blog/2021/05/making-smart-cities-the-power-of-hackathons/. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Hwang J-S (2020) The evolution of smart city in South Korea: the smart city winter and the city-as-a-platform. In: Joo Y-M, Tan T-B (eds) Smart cities in Asia: governing development in the era of hyper-connectivity. Edward Elgar Publishing, Toronto
Illmer A (2021) Singapore reveals Covid privacy data available to police. Available via BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55541001. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
International Telecommunications Union (ITU) (2021) Goal 11. Cities. Available via ITU https://www.itu.int/en/sustainable-world/Pages/goal11.aspx. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
IMD World Competitiveness Center (IMDWCC), SCO Smart City Observatory and Singapore University of Technology and Design (2020) Smart city index 2020: a tool for action, an instrument for better living for all citizens. Available via IMD https://www.imd.org/smart-city-observatory/smart-city-index/. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
IISD SDG Knowledge Hub (2018) SDG 11: building the world’s smart sustainable cities together. Available via IISD https://sdg.iisd.org/commentary/guest-articles/sdg-11-building-the-worlds-smart-sustainable-cities-together/. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Japan BrandVoice (2019) Japan sparks new life in local communities with human-centric smart cities. Available via Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/japan/2019/12/23/japan-sparks-new-life-in-local-communities-with-human-centric-smart-cities/?sh=a6c59c34398e. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Joo Y-M, Tan T-B (2020) Smart cities in Asia: an introduction. In Joo Y-M, Tan T-B (eds) Smart cities in Asia: governing development in the era of hyper-connectivity. Edward Elgar Publishing, Toronto
Kitchin R, Dodge M (2019) The (in)security of smart cities: vulnerabilities, risks, mitigation, and prevention. Available via Kitchin.org. https://kitchin.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/JUT-2019-Security-of-Smart-Cities.pdf. Accessed 6 Sept 2020
Landry J-N et al (2018) Open smart cities guide. Available via Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC). https://cippic.ca/en/Open_Smart_Cities. Accessed 6 Sept 2021
Ludher E et al (2018) ASEAN smart cities network. Available via Centre for Liveable Cities Singapore https://www.clc.gov.sg/docs/default-source/books/book-asean-smart-cities-network.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
Matsumoto T et al (2019) Trends for smart city strategies in emerging Asia. Available via OECD Regional Development Working Papers 2019/10. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/urban-rural-and-regional-development/trends-for-smart-city-strategies-in-emerging-asia_4fcef080-en. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
McKinsey Global Institute (2019) How can the private and public sectors work together to create smart cities? Available via MGI https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/how-can-the-private-and-public-sectors-work-together-to-create-smart-cities. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Muggah R, Goodman M (2019) Cities are easy prey for cybercriminals. Here’s how they can fight back. Available via World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/09/our-cities-are-increasingly-vulnerable-to-cyberattacks-heres-how-they-can-fight-back/. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Nam T, Pardo PA (2011) Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In: Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research. University at Albany, June 2011. 282–291. https://doi.org/10.1145/2037556.2037602. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
National Cyber Security Centre (2021) Connected places cyber security principles. Available via United Kingdom Government https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/files/NCSC-Connected-Places-security-principles-May-2020.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Ng A (2018) Smart cities around the world were exposed to simple hacks. Available via cnet. https://www.cnet.com/news/smart-cities-around-the-world-were-exposed-to-simple-hacks/. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Nussbaum B (2016) Smart cities—the cyber security and privacy implications of ubiquitous urban computing. Available via Stanford Center for Internet and Society http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2016/02/smart-cities-cyber-security-and-privacy-implications-ubiquitous-urban-computing. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Organisation for Economic Coordination and Development (2019) Enhancing the contribution of digitalisation to the smart cities of the future. Available via OECD https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/Smart-Cities-FINAL.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2020a) Leveraging digital technology and data for human-centric smart cities: the case of smart mobility report for the G20 digital economy task force. Available via OECD International Transportation Forum. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/data-human-centric-cities-mobility-g20.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, Korea (2020b) Smart cities and inclusive growth: building on the outcomes of the 1st OECD roundtable on smart cities and inclusive growth. Available via OECD https://www.oecd.org/cfe/cities/OECD_Policy_Paper_Smart_Cities_and_Inclusive_Growth.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
Pandey P et al (2020) Making smart cities cybersecure: ways to address distinct risks in an increasingly connected urban future. Available via Deloitte Center for Government Insights https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/de/Documents/risk/Report_making_smart_cities_cyber_secure.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
People’s Republic of China (nd) The 13th five-year plan for economic and social development of the People’s Republic of China (2016–2020). Available via Government of the People’s Republic of China https://en.ndrc.gov.cn/policies/202105/P020210527785800103339.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), SC 2000, c 5
Scassa T (2018) Smart cities data—governance challenges. Available via Teresa Scassa [blog]. https://www.teresascassa.ca/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=285:smart-cities-data-governance-challenges&Itemid=80
Scassa T (2020) Designing data governance for data sharing: lessons from sidewalk Toronto. Available via Technology and Regulation 44. https://techreg.org/index.php/techreg/article/view/51. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Shipilov A (2019) The real business case for quantum computing. Available via INSEAD. https://knowledge.insead.edu/blog/insead-blog/the-real-business-case-for-quantum-computing-10836. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Singapore Government Developer Portal (2021) TradeTogether-community-drive contract tracing. Available via Singapore Government Developer Portal. https://www.developer.tech.gov.sg/technologies/digital-solutions-to-address-covid-19/tracetogether. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Thales Group (2020) Singapore: the world’s smartest city. Available via Thales Group. https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/worldwide-digital-identity-and-security/iot/magazine/singapore-worlds-smartest-city. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
United Nations 2015 Resolution (2015) A/RES/70/1 transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Available via United Nations. https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (2021) Sustainable smart cities. Available via UNECE. https://unece.org/housing/sustainable-smart-cities. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
United Nations Economic and Social Council (UNECE) (2015) The UNECE-ITU smart sustainable cities indicators. Committee on Housing and Land Management. Seventy-sixth session 2015 ECE/HBP/2015/4. Available via UNECE. https://unece.org/DAM/hlm/projects/SMART_CITIES/ECE_HBP_2015_4.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
United Nations Economic and Social Council (UNECE) (2016) Smart cities and infrastructure: report of the Secretary General Commission on Science and Technology for Development. Nineteenth Session E/CN.16/2016/2 (May 9–13, 2016). Available via UNCTAD. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ecn162016d2_en.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
United Nations Economist Network (2020) Report of the UN economist network for the UN 75th anniversary: shaping the trends of our time. Available at UN. https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2020/10/20-124-UNEN-75Report-Full-EN-REVISED.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
United Nations Habitat (2020) World cities report 2020: the value of sustainable urbanization. Available via UN Habitat https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2020/10/wcr_2020_report.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
United Nations Habitat (2021) People-centered smart cities. Available via UN Habitat https://unhabitat.org/programme/people-centered-smart-cities. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
United Nations, Population Division, World Urbanization Prospects 2018 (2017) The world’s cities in 2018: data booklet. https://www.un.org/en/events/citiesday/assets/pdf/the_worlds_cities_in_2018_data_booklet.pdf. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
van Eerd R et al (2020) 2020 policy note on Asia: smart cities as engines for growth. Available via Organisation for Economic Coordination and Development. https://www.oecd.org/dev/EMnet-Asia-Policy-Note-2020.pdf. Accessed 6 Sept 2021
Whittaker Z (2021) Security lapse exposed a Chinese smart city surveillance system. Available via TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/03/china-smart-city-exposed/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
World Bank (2020) Urban development. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/overview#:~:text=With%20more%20than%2080%25%20of,and%20new%20ideas%20to%20emerge. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
World Economic Forum Prepared in Collaboration with PwC (2017) Harnessing public-private cooperation to deliver the new urban agenda. Available via WEF. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Harnessing_Public-Private_Cooperation_to_Deliver_the_New_Urban_Agenda_2017.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
World Economic Forum (2019) World economic forum to lead G20 smart cities alliance on technology governance. Available via WEF https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/06/world-economic-forum-to-lead-g20-smart-cities-alliance-on-technology-governance/. Accessed 30 Aug 2021
World Economic Forum (2020) In the face of extraordinary challenges, 36 pioneer cities chart a course towards a more ethical and responsible future. Available via WEF. https://www.weforum.org/press/2020/11/in-the-face-of-extraordinary-challenges-36-pioneer-cities-chart-a-course-towards-a-more-ethical-and-responsible-future. Accessed 29 Aug 2021
Yarime M (2020) Facilitating innovation for smart cities: the role of public policies in the case of Japan. In: Joo Y-M, Tan T-B (eds) Smart cities in Asia: governing development in the era of hyper-connectivity. Edward Elgar Publishing, Toronto
Yi-Ling T, Abdul Rahman MF (2021) Someone to watch over me: trusting surveillance in Singapore’s ‘smart nation’. Available via The Diplomat https://thediplomat.com/2021/01/someone-to-watch-over-me-trusting-surveillance-in-singapores-smart-nation/. Accessed 1 Sept 2021
Editors and Affiliations
© 2022 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Courtney Doagoo, B. (2022). Smart Cities in Asia: An Introductory Note. In: Phan, T., Damian, D. (eds) Smart Cities in Asia. SpringerBriefs in Geography. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1701-1_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-1700-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-1701-1