Advertisement

Smart Cities and the Quadruple Helix Innovation Systems Conceptual Framework: The Case of Portugal

  • Catarina Selada
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Democracy, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship for Growth book series (DIG)

Abstract

Smart cities are emerging as a new urban development model, responding to the economic importance of cities, to the process of urbanisation, and to the demand for a post-carbon model. Besides the diversity of the phenomenon, a smart city is a territory where the investments in human and social capital, and ICT infrastructures and networks promote economic development, environmental sustainability and a high quality of life, through participatory governance.

A city is not smart when it does not include all its stakeholders in the urban innovation process. Smart city is based on knowledge sharing and collaboration across all levels of society.

In this context, this chapter analyses the collaborative dynamics within the smart city arena in Portugal, stressing the role played by the helices of the Quadruple-helix innovation model: government, universities, industry and the civil society. The innovation process is analysed at urban level, being oriented to the co-creation of creative solutions to solve urban problems and to answer to city’s future challenges.

Crossing the theoretical framework with the analysis of international case studies, we find that the smart city context in Portugal is characterised by an embryonic Triple-helix innovation model. To increase the collaboration between smart city actors and to include the civil society in the urban innovation process are needed to build an attractive, sustainable and inclusive innovation ecosystem.

Keywords

Smart city Quadruple-helix Urban development Innovation Co-creation 

References

  1. ABI Research Institute. (2011). Smart cities: Municipal networking, communications, traffic/transportation, and energy.Google Scholar
  2. Afonso, O., Monteiro, S., Thompson, M. (2010). A growth model for the Quadruple-helix innovation theory. NIP WP 12/2010.Google Scholar
  3. Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alcatel, L. (2012). Getting smart about smart cities. Alcatel Lucent Market Analysis.Google Scholar
  5. Arnkil, R., Järvensivu, A., Koski, P., Piitainen, T. (2010). Exploring Quadruple-helix: Outlining user-oriented innovation models (Working Papers 85/2010). University of Tampere.Google Scholar
  6. Arup. (2010). Smart cities: Transforming the 21st century city via the creative use of technology. Arup.Google Scholar
  7. Arup. (2011). Climate Action in Megacities 2.0. Arup.Google Scholar
  8. Arup. (2014). Future cities: UK capabilities for urban innovation. Catapult Future Cities, Arup.Google Scholar
  9. Birmingham Smart City Commission. (2014). The roadmap to a Smarter Birmingham.Google Scholar
  10. Black & Veatch. (2016). 2016 strategic directions: U.S. smart city/smart utility report. Google Scholar
  11. Bollier, D. (2016). The city as platform – How digital networks are changing urban life and governance. The Aspen Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., Nijkamp, P. (2009). Smart cities in Europe. Series Research, Memoranda 0048.Google Scholar
  13. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  14. Chourabi, H., Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., Nam, T., Mellouli, S., Scholl, H. J., Walker, S., Nahon, K. (2012). Understanding smart cities: An integrative framework. 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
  15. Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster. (2012). Danish smart cities: Sustainable living in and urban world. Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, B. (2015). The three generations of smart cities. Co-exist.Google Scholar
  17. Cosgrave, E., Arbuthnot, K., & Tryfonas, T. (2013). Living labs, innovation districts and information marketplaces: A systems approach for smart cities. Procedia Computer Science, 16, 668–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. DBIS. (2013). The smart city market: Opportunities for the UK (BIS Research Paper n° 136).Google Scholar
  19. Department for Transport. (2015). Automated vehicles technologies testing: Code of practice.Google Scholar
  20. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdoff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Seot, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  22. Greenfield, A. (2013). Against the smart city. Kindle Edition. New York: Do projects.Google Scholar
  23. Hollands, R. G. (2008). Will the real smart city please stand up? City, 12(3), 303–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. INTELI. (2014). Roadmap Smart Cities Portugal. Lisboa: INTELI.Google Scholar
  25. IBM. (2011). Smarter cities series: A foundation for understanding IBM smarter cities. USA (New York): Redbooks.Google Scholar
  26. Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. Geojournal, 79, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kline, J., & Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. In R. Landau & N. Rosenberg (Eds.), The positive sum strategies: Harnessing technology for economic growth (pp. 275–305). Washington, DC: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
  28. Lee, J., Hancock, & M. (2012). Towards a framework for smart cities: A comparison of Seoul, San Francisco & Amsterdam. Standford Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship.Google Scholar
  29. Liljemark, T. (2004). Innovation policy in Canada. Strategy and realities. Östersund: Swedish Institute for Growth Policy Studies.Google Scholar
  30. Lundvall, B. (1988). Innovation as an interactive process: From user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In G. Dosi et al. (Eds.), Technical change and economic theory (pp. 349–369). London/New York: Pinter Publisher.Google Scholar
  31. MacKinsey Global Institute. (2011). Urban world: Mapping the economic power of cities. New York: McKinsey Global Institute.Google Scholar
  32. Matofska, B. (2016). What is the sharing economy? The people who share.Google Scholar
  33. Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National systems of innovation: A comparative study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Ovum. (2011). Is your city smart enough? Analysis Insight.Google Scholar
  35. METI (2015). Plan Nacional de Ciudades Inteligentes. March 2015.Google Scholar
  36. Pike Research. (2011). Smart cities: Intelligent information and communications, technology infrastructure in the government, buildings, transport, and utility domains. Research Report, 2Q 2012.Google Scholar
  37. Porter, M. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. London: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rial, N. (2013). The power of big data in Europe. New Europe. 24 May.Google Scholar
  39. Robinson, R. (2016). Why smart cities aren’t working for us after 20 years. And how can we fix them. The Urban Technologist.Google Scholar
  40. Saunders, T., Baeck, P. (2015). Rethinking smart cities from the ground up. NESTA, Intel, UNDP.Google Scholar
  41. Shadi, R., Khoury, R., Karam, D., & Rahbani, J. (2015). Smart cities: A gateway to digital life. USA (Virginia): Booz, Allen, Amilton.Google Scholar
  42. Smart Cities Stakeholder Platform. (2013). Guidance document – Integrated action plan – Report process & guidelines for smart cities, 02.06.2013.Google Scholar
  43. Smart City Wien Agency. (2014). Smart city Wien – Framework strategy. Vienna City Administration.Google Scholar
  44. Ståhlbröst, A., & Holst, M. (2012). The living lab methodology handbook. Sweden: Lulea University of Technology.Google Scholar
  45. Townsend, A. (2013). Smart cities: Big data, civic hackers, and the quest for a new Utopia.Google Scholar
  46. Townsend, A. (2015a). The future of urban science: New horizons in research on human settlements. Future of Urban Science.Google Scholar
  47. Townsend, A. (2015b). Making sense of the new urban science. Data & Society Research Institute, Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy & Management, NYU.Google Scholar
  48. UN. (2015). World population prospects: The 2015 revision. USA (New York): UN.Google Scholar
  49. Vienna University of Technology, University of Ljubljana, TU Delft. (2007). Smart cities: Ranking of European medium-sized cities. Final report, October 2007.Google Scholar
  50. Von Hippel, E. (1988). The sources of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Wired. (2016). Inside Masdar City, the UAE’s Zero-Carbon City that will never be.Google Scholar

Web Pages

  1. http://www.openlivinglabs.eu/. Accessed 15 June 2016.
  2. http://hopendata.bcn.cat/opendata/es. Accessed 15 June 2016.
  3. http://nycopendata.socrata.com/. Accessed 15 June 2016.
  4. http://futurecities.catapult.org.uk. Accessed 15 June 2016.
  5. http://ec.europa.eu/eip/smartcities/. Accessed 15 June 2016.
  6. http://www.ams-institute.org. Accessed 18 June 2016.
  7. http://www.coruna.es/. Accessed 18 June 2016.
  8. http://cusp.nyu.edu/. Accessed 18 June 2016.
  9. http://amsterdamsmartcity.com/. Accessed 08 June 2016.
  10. http://dados.cm-lisboa.pt/. Accessed 08 June 2016.
  11. http://www.novaims.unl.pt/sc. Accessed 17 June 2016.
  12. http://www.portugalparticipa.pt. Accessed 17 June 2016.
  13. http://www.desafiosporto.pt/. Accessed 17 June 2016.
  14. http://ciclaveiro.pt/. Accessed 18 June 2016.
  15. http://metrolab.heinz.cmu.edu/. Accessed 18 June 2016.
  16. http://riomais.benfeitoria.com/. Accessed 18 June 2016.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catarina Selada
    • 1
  1. 1.INTELI—Inteligência em Inovação, Centro de Inovação, Cities UnitLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations