Innovation, Sustainability and Citizen-Centricity through Smart Cities: Lessons for India

Abstract

Across the globe, smart cities have emerged as instruments for facilitating innovative and citizen-centric urban transformation with sustainable digital approaches being embodied in city planning, infrastructure and service-design. In India, Smart Cities Mission was initiated by the Government in 2015 with an ambitious endeavour to improve quality of life by employing ‘smart solutions’ in 100 selected cities by strengthening their socio-economic, physical and institutional pillars. This paper reviews some of the best global practices that can further metamorphose India’s smart cities into innovative, sustainable and citizen-centric urban spaces. This paper uses secondary data from research articles, government reports, and websites. Through descriptive analysis, it highlights the importance of policy transfers in addressing emerging urbanisation challenges and facilitating the effective implementation of Smart Cities.

Based on the review, the paper suggests ten lessons for India which include, among others, a bottom-up approach in policy and planning, employing collaborative-technology, strengthening local governments and making people ‘smart’ to nudge them to act as true ‘agents of change.’

Keywords

Best Practices, Citizen- Centricity, Innovation, Smart Cities, Sustainability.

Introduction

The Smart Cities Mission (SCM) has opened up a vista of opportunities for urban re-development and transformation. The mission encourages using ‘smart solutions’ to propel economic growth and to ameliorate the quality of life of the citizens through comprehensive work on physical, institutional, economic and social pillars of the city. It aims to promote cities that provide core infrastructure and a clean environment through effective use of technology. Sustainability and inclusiveness are vital aspects for the creation of ‘replicable models’ which may act as lighthouses to other aspiring cities. While India hopes to transform its urban spaces, many countries around the world provide crucial Smart City lessons to learn from. Innovation through smart technology and effective governance, sustainability measures and citizen-centricity emerge as the pivotal aspects that can metamorphose Indian cities to combat the challenges of rapid urbanisation and become more environment-friendly, equitable and liveable.

Aim and Methodology

This study aims to compile some of the best practices from around the world that may guide India to transform its cities and towns into innovative, sustainable, and citizen-centric urban spaces. The paper adopts a qualitative approach to collate the elements of Smart City initiatives from around the world that can be applied to Indian urban spaces. The data for the study has been collected from secondary sources, viz. official government websites and reports of various governmental and non-governmental bodies, journal articles, newspaper reports, etc.

This paper has been divided into five sections. The first section explicates the crises brought about by urbanisation and the opportunities that have emerged with the digital revolution. Consequently, it traces the conceptual evolution of Smart Cities and the status of Smart Cities in India. Sections two, three and four highlight the successful Smart Cities initiatives around the globe in terms of innovation, sustainability and citizen-centricity, respectively. It describes how cities worldwide tackle urban problems using clean and collaborative technology. The final section highlights ten key findings of the study, providing vital lessons for India to adopt and apply to its own unique context.

Urbanisation and Digital Revolution

Converting the Urbanisation Crises into Opportunities

According to the World Economic Forum (2015), it is estimated that nearly 66 per cent of global population will live in urban areas by 2050. Narratives on urban transformation have been driven by the recognition of the opportunity as well as the need for radical change towards smart, sustainable, and resilient cities (Albino, Berardi and Dangelico 2015, Hölscher and Frantzeskaki 2021, Wolfram, Borgström and Farrelly 2019). Telecommunication, digital technologies, transport systems, trade liberalisation, etc. are ‘shrinking’ the world and making it ‘smaller’ in terms of the speed of information and material flows across the globe. Concomitantly, globalisation generates its own demand for expeditious social and economic interactions. This nudges people to move towards bigger cities, with their benefits of “proximity, accessibility and productivity” (Algayerova, 2020).

While technology is seen as a boon for progressive urban transformation, that alone does not suffice for a city to become smart and sustainable. The government has a novel responsibility of involving and influencing key stakeholders to get things done, through interaction rather than through mere coercive direction and fear of penalisation (Colebatch, 2014). A participatory approach encourages policymakers and relevant stakeholders to join hands to distribute the burden of sustainable administration, build trust and identify the real needs of the community.

A Digital Revolution amidst Looming Uncertainties

Precarious events like the financial crisis of 2008, and the COVID-19 pandemic engendered enduring repercussions in already economically-weaker cities. The effects on vulnerable groups are especially strong in countries with exacerbating social and economic inequalities, which are also traditionally spatially segregated (Algayerova, 2020), making them vulnerable and raising concerns of equity and inclusiveness.

At the same time, the ‘fourth industrial revolution’ is transforming economic and social lives which are being affected by big data, cloud computing, the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence (AI), machine learning, high-speed internet, etc. (Kauf, 2020). This has engendered a ray of hope for countries to expeditiously transform their cities on lines of innovation, sustainability, and citizen-centricity.

Conceptual Evolution

The Odyssey of Smart Cities

Putatively, the phrase, ‘Smart Cities’ has its origin in the concept of Smart Growth that focused on an alternative paradigm to deal with detached housing, dependence on automobiles, urban sprawl and new policies for urban planning (Bollier, 1998; Bhattacharya, et al., 2015). It accentuated mixed land-use and compact design, newer transportation and housing alternatives and a feeling of community living. Portland, Oregon, is widely believed to be an example of Smart Growth (Harrison and Donnelly, 2011). A novel concept called ‘Intelligent Cities’ displaced it in the 1990s, emphasising how data and information technology could impact the functioning of cities (Bhattacharya et al., 2015). Some technology companies (IBM et al., 2009) adopted the phrase since 2005 (Harrison and Donnelly, 2011).

In 2008, the global economic crisis caused by extreme reductions in urban finances adversely impacted social welfare. Assistance to render urban public services was sought from the private sector (Paroutis, Bennett and Heracleous, 2014). Thus, the Smart City Model emerged, allowing an interface with the city as a network of complex information flow providing better infrastructure and services. This allowed cities to integrate operations and optimise efficiency in different sectors including buildings, transportation, electrical and water distribution, and public safety. The ‘Smarter Cities’ trademark was officially registered to IBM, in 2011 (Bhattacharya et al., 2015).

Definitions and Components: What Makes a City ‘Smart?’

Caragliu, Del and Nijkamp (2011) term a city smart “when investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance.” Several key components emerge in the existing literature on smart cities as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Focus Areas in Definitions of Smart City

Smart cities are based on the utilisation of human, collective, and technological capital for the development of urban agglomerations (Angelidou 2014). Though scores of definitions and descriptions of what a smart city is, can be found in the existing literature, there is no unanimous consensus on a standard definition of a smart city (Nam and Pardo, 2011).

The evolution of the models of smart cities is reflective of the growing importance of governance, the shift to citizen-centric approaches (Dameri, 2013), and the key role assigned to stakeholders (Dameri, 2013, Leydesdorff and Deakin 2011, Lombardi et al. 2011). Center for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP) in its review (brings out the degree of emphasis on various components of a Smart City in the existing literature (Bhattacharya et al., 2015). They observe that ‘equity’ does not get considerable recognition as an outcome of sustainable cities. This partially indicates a lack of a responsive effort to include the marginalised and disadvantaged sections in planning of smart attributes of the city.

The Idiosyncratic Context of India

The Smart Cities Mission was launched by the Hon’ble Prime Minister on 25th June 2015. The primary objective of the Mission is to promote cities that provide basic infrastructure, ensure a clean and sustainable environment, and enhance the quality of life for citizens through the implementation of ‘smart solutions’.The Mission aims at providing quality of life and driving economic growth through comprehensive work on physical, institutional, social and economic pillars. The focus is on sustainable and inclusive development by creation of replicable models which act as lighthouses to other aspiring cities. 100 cities have been selected to be developed as Smart Cities through a two-stage competition (Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, 2021).

According to Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (2021), our future in this century will be defined by three major trends: growing inequities, changing climate and the fourth Industrial Revolution. Therefore, there is a need to address structural causes of migration viz. agrarian crises caused by natural disasters, lack of job opportunities for rural people and ineffective land reforms. Some other concerns are the needs and rights of women, children and the marginalised sections of society. An ambitious government plan to upgrade India’s cities must not jeopardise further marginalisation of the poor and minority communities during slum evictions (Chandran, 2017). The lack of capacities in our city administration as envisioned in the 74th Amendment Act, 1993, forms the rationale behind the creation of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) (Joshi, 2016). Besides the lack of charismatic leadership, procedural and financial impediments hinder effective planning and implementation of projects. Public–Private Partnership (PPP), especially in the North-East States is minimal (Shukla, 2015).

Despite India’s unique context, several cities around the world offer outstanding examples of innovative, sustainable, and citizen-centric initiatives that India can adapt to suit its own needs.

Innovations Ideation and Interaction

According to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2005), innovation implies creating and applying new knowledge to contribute, in new ways, towards building a path for a sustainable future. It may involve new ways of governing, structuring partnerships, managing social relationships or new organisational practices. It is about trying and finding better ways for people to interact and thrive beyond mere scientific research and profit-oriented, private sector activities.

Jakarta, Indonesia, experiences severe annual flooding during the rainy season. To address this, researchers developed PetaJakarta, a real-time flood map that crowd-sources flood reports from Twitter. In Seoul, South Korea, the Sharing City Seoul initiative encourages residents to make better use of the resources they already own. Services such as the local car-sharing company SoCar and websites like Billiji, which help neighbours share items, aim to offer alternatives to ownership—particularly for things that are rarely used. (Saunders and Baeck, 2015).

Smart Technology: An Example of London

New digital technologies have had a profound impact on the way London functions. The Congestion Charging Zone uses cameras and software to automatically recognise car number plates, helping to manage traffic effectively. The London Air Quality Network employs digital sensing equipment to monitor and map air pollution across the city. Additionally, Transport for London has planned the installation of sensors at road crossings to enhance pedestrian safety. London also aims to invest in Smart Grids, which will help streamline road maintenance and construction, making urban infrastructure more efficient and responsive. (Saunders and Baeck, 2015).

One of the prime underused assets is cars. Available data reveals that they remain idle for 96 per cent of their life (Bates and Leibling, 2012). This has a drastic impact on cities in terms of the amount of space that is dedicated to car parks. The United Kingdom has an estimated 8 to eleven million regulated parking spaces and further seventeen million unregulated ones (British Parking Association, 2013).

In Singapore, a city–state where housing is extremely dense and expensive, roads take up twelve per cent of the total land area, compared to fourteen per cent for housing (Budget Direct, 2019).

Strategic Sustainable City Planning

Lessons from Europe

Strategic urban planning aims to develop a collective vision of metropolitan dynamics through coordination among public and private efforts and participation of citizens and stakeholders. This is done by channelising resources to adapt to new situations and by improving the living standards of citizens. It provides a methodology to identify strengths and weaknesses, and to define the main strategies for local development (Paroutis, Bennett and Heracleous, 2017).

STCCEEP (Systems Thinking for Comprehensive City Efficient Energy Planning) was delivered in partnership with San Sebastian (Spain), Bristol (United Kingdom) and Florence (Italy). An innovative European project, ‘systems thinking methodology’ using open-data sourcing was adopted to enhance efficiency. It focused on the application of smart city concepts through an integrated approach. It aims to learn from the prowess of one another in devising sustainable practices (Centre for Sustainable Energy, 2013).

The InSMART project was tested in the towns of Nottingham (United Kingdom), Trikala (Greece), Cesena (Italy), and Évora (Portugal). It aimed to optimise energy flows based on economic, environmental, and social criteria. The project paved the way for the implementation of priority operations in urban energy planning, contributing to smarter, more sustainable cities. (CORDIS, 2014).

The PLEEC project targeted reduction in energy use in Europe. It contributed to the European Union’s 20-20-20 targets. Tartu (Estonia), Jyvaskyla (Finland), Turku (Finland), Santiago de Compostela (Spain), Eskilstuna (Sweden), and Stoke-on-Trent (United Kingdom) were involved. Based on an evidence-based strategic planning approach, and taking into account the local conditions, the Energy Efficiency Action Plans have also been developed to enforce endogenous urban development.

Gothenburg, Glasgow, Ghent, and Riga under the STEP-UP project targeted convergence of urban planning and energy. This would help cities enhance their Sustainable Energy Action Plans with convergence of the ICT and energy sectors (Groth, Fertner and Grosse, 2016).

Efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions were made as part of the TRANSFORM project, which was coordinated by Lyon (France), Vienna (Austria), and (Germany). It considered all pertinent energy flows and environmental factors using robust stakeholder procedures and data analytics, creating win-win commercial models for parties with initially divergent interests. (Van der Veen, 2016).

Sustainability Initiatives

In the city of Oslo, where Disruptive Technologies is based, any service that can be digitalised is being digitalised. The city is advancing in areas such as circular waste management, green energy systems, and the testing of electric buses. It is also promoting zero-emission construction sites and the retrofitting of existing buildings with sensors and Building Management Systems (BMS) to enhance energy efficiency and sustainability. (Roth et al., 2021).

Emitting and Committing

By 2025, Copenhagen is expected be the world’s first carbon-neutral city, while Denmark has been committed to becoming fossil-fuel-free by 2050 (Birnbaum, 2019).

Sustainable transportation alone has eliminated more than a third of all fossil fuel usage in the transportation sector, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by ninety-thousand tons annually. The city makes wise use of GPS in buses, wireless data from mobile devices, and sensors in sewers and garbage cans. These innovations enable real-time assessment of the city’s condition, allowing for continuous improvements to reduce traffic congestion, air pollution, and CO₂ emissions. (Law 2022).

Planning of eco-smart cities, that are completely vehicle-free is being focused and emphasised upon. For instance, in 2021, Singapore declared creation of such a city in Tengah, in the west of Singapore. It comprises five districts with 42,000 homes in a planned forest city, and facilitates safe zones for pedestrians and cyclists (Lai, 2021).

In Oslo, the capital of Norway, the transition to zero-emission cars is catching pace. They are allowed to run on bus lanes and park for free and enjoy reduced tolls. Oslo hopes to scrap non-electric vehicles by 2025. 70 per cent of cars purchased in 2020 were electric (Law, 2022).

Clean Energy, Green Spaces

Zurich has an ambitious goal of becoming a 2000-watt society by 2050. The Green City Zurich project aims to preserve and increase all green spaces. Allocation of funds by the government for energy efficiency, renewable sources, and raising the public awareness on sustainability becomes essential to fulfil these endeavours (Mombelli, 2016).

Sydney began the Sustainable Sydney 2030 initiative to reduce the city’s carbon emissions by seventy per cent. This goal will be beneficial for its residents because the quality of breathing air will improve along with reviving dying ecosystems. In addition, Sydney envisions a Smart City for the future to help improve public transportation, bring its citizens together and overall make the city more sustainable (GreenMatch, 2018).

In 2009, the Amsterdam Smart City programme was launched to achieve the city’s environmental goals, through cutting-edge technologies. According to the city’s strategy, CO2 emissions will be cut by forty per cent by 2025. By 2025, all non-electric vehicles will be phased out of Oslo, with more than seventy per cent cars purchased in 2020 being electric. Oslo seeks to expedite the switch to ‘zero emissions’ automobiles by allowing them to use bus lanes for free parking and lower fees. Copenhagen adopts an innovative approach to use technology to make the city more ecologically-friendly and improve the quality of life. Real-time data on traffic, air pollution, and CO2 emissions is collected using mobile devices, GPS on buses, and sensors on sewers and garbage cans (The CSR Journal, 2022).

Citizen-Centricity: Towards Collaborative Governance

Many city governments are increasingly viewing the collaborative economy (also known as the sharing economy) as a valuable tool for tackling urban challenges. The term ‘sharing city’ has emerged to describe a more systematic approach for promoting the collaborative economy in cities (Saunders and Baeck, 2015). While Berlin, Amsterdam, Seoul and a network of 15 US cities are experimenting with various approaches, there is no consensus on a common definition or framework for a sharing city.

Sharehub, in Seoul, aims to promote public acceptance of the collaborative economy as part of the Sharing City Seoul initiative. It was launched in 2013, and facilitated large public engagements and education campaigns involving conferences, seminars, reports, etc.

Participatory Policymaking: Hearing What the Common-Man Has to Say

In Beijing, an app called, ‘I love Beijing’ helps in reporting issues of broken streetlights and potholes to the city administration. Going a step ahead of reporting apps like FixMyStreet in the UK, it also includes a map of the informal food markets of the city. The residents may also include the opening times, new market and the types of goods, they sell, in the same app., The citizens of Reykjavik, Iceland, have, Better Reykjavik — a website, to propose, debate and vote on ideas for reforming the city. Monthly debates on popular issues are held by the city council. Nearly €1.9 million has been spent on developing more than 200 projects proposed by citizens by the city government. Likewise, in Paris, ‘Madame Mayor, I have an idea’ is a participatory budgeting process, allowing citizens to suggest and vote on ideas for projects in Paris (Saunders and Baeck, 2015).

In Bangalore, a local NGO called the MOD Institute facilitated the development of a community vision for the Shanthingar neighbourhood. As part of this initiative, the organisation encouraged online debates among residents, fostering participatory dialogue about local issues. One key concern that emerged from these discussions was the prevalence of abandoned urban spaces. To address this, the MOD Institute developed user-friendly software that allowed residents to map these neglected areas using smartphones or SMS, enabling collective identification and potential revitalisation of these spaces.

Making better use of time, skills and everyday belongings

Smart City Zurich, launched in 2018, was aimed to bolster innovation and transformation of Zurich into a Smart City. Updated digital infrastructure, integrated public transportation, and ‘smart participation,’ — were some of its key areas of focus This encourages participation of businesses and individuals in building Smart City Zurich (Saunders and Baeck, 2015).

-Intelligent Streetlights (Glasgow): The streetlights turn on and off as people walk through them at night. This helps save energy when the lights are not needed. (Griffiths n.d.).

-Smart Bins (Barcelona): These are used to optimise the route of waste-collection vans by signalling only those bins that are full. Ten per cent is estimated to be saved on waste disposal through these bins (Romualdo-Suzuki and Finkelstein, 2020).

-Citywide Sensing (Santander): Santander, in Spain, has over 12,000 sensors. From garnering data on parking spaces to air quality, sensors are used across the city. The pilot-project focused on the concept of city–wide sensing networks, and bringing about effective changes by gathering data on everyday activities and services (Newcombe, 2014).

-Smart Buildings (London): The Cognicity Challenge was initiated by the Canary Wharf group in 2014. It aimed to identify and pilot smart city technologies on its estate. In addition to other technologies, it tested Demand Logic, aimed at helping businesses minimise electricity costs by intelligently monitoring electricity usage (Dunsby, 2014).

-Traffic Management (Singapore): Singapore’s Intelligent Transport System includes electronic road pricing (ERP) and sensors attached to taxis that help the government map traffic conditions. ERP, alongside regulation, has helped reduce the number of journeys by private cars in Singapore (Land Transport Authority Singapore n.d.).

Lessons for India

The following lessons for India can be drawn from the best practices followed around the world:

-Smart Technology for Better Livelihood: Digital Technology, IoT, internet, etc. facilitate real-time data, which must be employed to find solutions for smart energy, transportation, data, infrastructure and mobility. London’s example of the use of air quality networks, smart grids, regulated parking spaces, etc. shows the transformational power of technology. Like India, Singapore has extremely dense and expensive housing and road networks. Yet, through technology, it has taken commendable steps towards traffic management and is committed to be vehicle free soon.

-Knowledge Organisation and Learning: Evidence-based policies and programmes, which do not neglect stakeholders’ opinions, need to be framed. Formalising mechanisms for collaboration and partnerships between cities, as well as establishing regional or international networks and repositories of smart cities, can significantly accelerate the transfer of policies and practices. These platforms would serve as valuable resources for collecting and disseminating case studies, best practices, and governance lessons, thereby enhancing the capacity of urban planners and policymakers to design and implement effective strategies for smart city development. (Li, et al. 2022).

-S.M.A.R.T. Local Governance: Local administration must not only adopt smart technology and plans but also be ‘Simple, Moral, Accountable, Responsive and Transparent.’ The credit for and burden of failure of programmes must be shared between the local administrators, the stakeholders and the citizens, and further actions must be taken collectively and responsibly.

-Planning, Implementation and Monitoring: Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (2022) promotes a perspective based on a demand and integration. It accentuates improvements in frameworks and designs for urban planning. By upgrading policy, providing infrastructure and technical guidance, carrying out pilot projects for ‘learning-by-doing,’ it helps mainstream innovations by testing technology solutions to metamorphose India’s urban landscape. The ‘Citizen

Outreach Campaign’ for demystifying urban planning, and revision of Town and Country Planning Acts recommended by NITI Aayog (NITI Aayog, 2021) can further guide smart cities.

-Strengthening Local Leadership and Simplifying Procedures: For re-engineering urban governance, people-oriented, responsible leaders, clear rules and regulations, and division of responsibilities and authority are needed. A dynamic organisational structure and extensive adoption of technology can enable public participation and inter-agency coordination. Moreover, steps for strengthening urban planning education system must be undertaken.

-Inclusiveness and Equity: Development must be collaborative and not imposed, taking along all sections, especially the marginalised and the slum-area masses. The needs of women, children, elderly, physically challenged, and socially and economically backward sections of society must be given due consideration while planning and implementing smart city projects.

-Emphasising Quality of Life: Public security and safety, better check on crimes, faster ways to commute, better public health and sanitation and social connectedness facilitated through smart technology and smart governance, can help improve the standards of living of people. Efficient intelligent energy networks, automation, optimised energy use, access to information and smart infrastructure help make the people smart and informed and can improve their quality of life.

-Commitment to Environmental Conservation: A healthy environment entails resource conservation and regeneration, clean energy and green spaces, and rational emission commitments. Commitments at global forums will be realised only by acting locally.

-Socio-Economic Stability: To ensure resilience, a healthy environment and socio-politico-economic sustainability are key prerequisites. The resilience of cities must be bolstered to improve adaptability and livability. By minimising inequality and injustice, social conflicts must be avoided and harmony and order must be promoted. While attempting to prevent wastage of resources (men, money, material), means to optimally utilise them must be adopted.

-Smart People, not just Smart Technology: Citizen-engagement and motivation for collaboration with the city administration in the co-design and co-creation of civic solutions increases contributions to address urban and social issues of common concern. The formidable challenge is not the installation of infrastructure or adoption of new technologies but the involvement of the public sphere in the civic life (Oliveira and Campolargo, 2015). Through education, dialogue and collaboration, the administration must take steps to make not only the city but also the people ‘smart.’

Table 2 summarises key international initiatives that offer valuable lessons and models from which India can learn to enhance its smart city and collaborative urban development strategies.

Table 2: At a Glance: Initiatives for India to Learn From

Conclusion

Smart Cities, through ICT, are helping cities combat the challenges of rapid urbanisation, while creating newer opportunities for people, in terms of employment, quality of life and leisure. More recently, there has been a shift in the focus of Smart Cities from emphasis on mere technology to citizen-centric urban transformation. The Smart Cities Mission has been a crucial step for the development of India’s major cities. The best practices and unique cases in innovation, sustainability, and citizen-centricity from all over the world can guide India to learn from the successes and failures of other countries, after eight years of its conception. This study finds that efficient use of smart technology, knowledge organisation, effective and responsible local administration, charismatic leadership and strategic planning, implementation and monitoring of programmes are crucial lessons for India to take back and work on. To make the people ‘smart,’ India must stay committed to achieving inclusiveness, equity, quality of life and environmental sustainability. Participation, dialogue, and stakeholders’ engagement facilitated through technology and administered through innovative governance measures are crucial for India to light up the path of its urban spaces, and to make them inclusive, equitable, sustainable and truly smart.

Declaration of Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

Albino, Vito, Umberto Berardi, and Rosa Maria Dangelico. (2015). Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, Vol 22, No 1, pp 3-21. doi:10.1080/10630732.2014.942092

Algayerova, Olga. (2020). “People-Smart Sustainable Cities,” UNECE, https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/SSC%20nexus_web_opt_ENG_0.pdf.

Angelidou, Margarita. (2014). “Smart City Policies: A Spatial Approach,” Cities, Vol 41, No 1, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.06.007.

Bates, John and David Leibling. (2009). “Spaced Out: Perspectives on Parking Policy,” RAC Foundation, https://trid.trb.org/view/1225136

Bhattacharya, Shrimoyee, Sujaya Rathi, Sonali Anusree Patro, and Niepukhrie Tepa. (2015). “Reconceptualising smart cities: a reference framework for India.” CSTEP, https://www.niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/document_publication/CSTEP%20Report%20Smart%20Cities%20Framework.pdf

Birnbaum, Michael. (2019, November 19). “What it takes to be carbon neutral — for a family, a city, a country,” Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2019/11/19/what-it-takes-be-carbon-neutral-family-city-country/

Bollier, David. (1998). How Smart Growth Can Stop Sprawl: A Fledgling Citizen Movement Expands: A Briefing Guide for Funders 1998, Washington: Essential Books.

British Parking Association. (2013). “The size and shape of the UK parking profession,” Haywards Heath, http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/documents/library/.

Budget Direct. (2019, October). “Why are cars so expensive in Singapore?” Budget Direct, https://www.budgetdirect.com.sg/car-insurance/research/why-are-cars-so-expensive-in-singapore.

Caragliu, Andrea, Del Bo Chiara and Peter Nijkamp. (2011). “Smart Cities in Europe,” Journal of Urban Technology, Vol 18, No 2, pp 65–82.

Centre for Sustainable Energy. (2013). “STEEP: Systems Thinking for Efficient Energy Planning.” London: Government Press, https://www.cse.org.uk/projects/view/1244.

Chandran, Rina. (2017, June 12). “‘No place for the poor’ in India’s Smart Cities, campaigners say,” Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/article/india-landrights-cities-idUSL8N1J90D0

Chaudhry, Shivani, Swapnil Saxena, and Deepak Kumar. (2018). “India’s Smart Cities Mission: Smart for Whom? Cities for Whom?” Housing and Land Rights Network, https://www.hlrn.org.in/documents/Smart_Cities_Report_2018.pdf.

Colebatch, Hal. (2014). “Making sense of governance,” Policy and Society, Vol 33, No 4, pp 307-316, doi:10.1016/j.polsoc.2014.10.001.

CORDIS. (2014). “Integrative Smart City Planning,” European Commission, https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/314164.

Dameri, Renata Paola. (2013). “Searching for Smart City Definition: A Comprehensive Proposal,” International Journal of Computers and Technology, Vol 11, No 5, pp 2544–2551.

Dunsby, Megan. (2014, October 21). “Canary Wharf Group unveils smart city accelerator initiative,” Startups, https://startups.co.uk/news/canary-wharf-group-unveils-smart-city-accelerator-initiative/

Giffinger, Rudolf, Christian Fertner, Hans Kramar, and Evert Meijers. (2007). Smart Cities: Ranking of European Medium-Sized Cities, Vienna, Austria: Centre of Regional Science (SRF), Vienna University of Technology, http://www.smartcities.eu/download/smart_cities_final_report.pdf.

GreenMatch. (2018). “Sustainable and Smart Cities Around the World,” Greenmatch, https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/2017/04/sustainable-and-smart-cities-around-the-world.

Griffiths, Hannah. (2017). “The future of street lighting: The potential for new service development,” Future Cities Catapult, https://iotuk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/The-Future-of-Street-Lighting.pdf

Groth, Niels Boje, Christian Fertner, and Juliane Grosse. (2016). “Urban Energy Generation and the Role of Cities,” Journal of Settlements and Spatial Planning, Vol 5, No 5, DOI: 10.19188/02JSSPSI052016.

Hall, Robert E., B. Bowerman, J. Braverman, J. Taylor, H. Todosow, and U. Von Wimmersperg. (2000). “The vision of a smart city,” In Proceedings of the 2nd International Life Extension Technology Workshop, Vol. 28, http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/773961- oyxp82/webviewable/773961.pdf.

Harrison, Colin, and Ian Abbott Donnelly. (2011, September). “A theory of smart cities,” In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the ISSS-2011, Hull, UK.

Hölscher, Katharina, and Niki Frantzeskaki. (2021). “Perspectives on urban transformation research: transformations in, of, and by cities.” Urban Transformations, Vol 3, No 1, pp 1-14.

IBM. (2009). “Smarter Cities: New cognitive approaches to long-standing challenges,” International Business Machines, http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/smartercities/article/newyork2009.html.

Joshi, Bhanu. (2016, June 28). “Smart Cities Mission: Flaws in a flagship programme.” The Hindu, https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/Smart-Cities-Mission-Flaws-in-a-flagship-programme/article62116296.ece.

Kauf, Sabina. (2020). “Smart City in the era of the fourth industrial revolution,” Scientific Papers of the Silesian University of Technology, https://managementpapers.polsl.pl/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/145_Kauf.pdf

Lai, Olivia. (2021, July 13). “Smart Cities: Top 7 Smart Cities in the World and How They Do It,” Earth.org, https://earth.org/top-7-smart-cities-in-the-world/.

Land Transport Authority (n.d.): “Land Transport Authority (LTA),” Singapore City: Government of Singapore, https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/ltagov/en.html.

Law, Marcus. (2022, September 20). “Top 10 sustainable smart cities helping make a better world,” Technology, https://technologymagazine.com/top10/top-10-sustainable-smart-cities-helping- make-a-better-world.

Leydesdorff, Loet, and Mark Deakin. (2011). “The triple-helix model of smart cities: A neo-evolutionary perspective.” Journal of Urban Technology, Vol 18, No 2, pp 53-63.

Li, Lili, Araz Taeihagh and Si Ying Tan. (2022). “What factors drive policy transfer in smart city development? Insights from a Delphi study,” Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol 84.

Lombardi, Patrizia, Silvia Giordano, Hend Farouh, and Y. Wael. (2011). “An analytic network model for Smart cities.” In Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on the AHP, pp 15-18.

Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. (2021). “About the Mission: Smartcities,” New Delhi: Government of India, https://smartcities.gov.in/about-the-mission.

Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. (2022). “Sustainable Cities Integrated Approach Pilot (SCIAP),” UN-Habitat India, https://www.unhabitat.org.in/projects/sustainable-cities-integrated-approach-pilot-(sciap).

Mombelli, Armando. (2016, February 15). “2,000-watt society: when the future becomes a reality,” SWI Swissinfo.ch, https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/energy-efficiency_2000-watt-society-when-the-future-becomes-a-reality/41958718.

Nam, Taewoo, and Theresa A. Pardo. (2011, June). “Conceptualising smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions,” In Proceedings of the 12th annual international digital government research conference: digital government innovation in challenging times, pp 282-291, https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/2037556.2037602.

Newcombe, Tod. (2014, April 28). “Santander: The Smartest Smart City,” Government Technology, https://www.govtech.com/data/santander-the-smartest-smart-city.html.

NITI Aayog. (2021). “Reforms in Urban Planning Capacity in India.” New Delhi: Government of India, https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2021-09/UrbanPlanningCapacity-in-India- 16092021.pdf.

OECD. (2005). “Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data,” Paris: Oslo Publishing, https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/oslo-manual_9789264013100-en.

OECD. (2019). “Enhancing the Contribution of Digitalisation to the Smart Cities of the Future,” Paris: Oslo Publishing, https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/Smart-Cities-FINAL.pdf.

Oliveira, Álvaro, and Margarida Campolargo. (2015, January). “From smart cities to human smart cities,” In 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, pp. 2336-2344, doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2015.281.

Paroutis, Sotirios, Mark Bennett, and Loizos Heracleous. (2014). “A strategic view on smart city technology: The case of IBM Smarter Cities during a recession,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol 89, pp 262-272, https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/wbs/subjects/sib/people/sotirios_profile/paroutis_bennett_heracleous_13_tfsc.pdf.

Paroutis, Sotirios, Mark Bennett, and Loizos Heracleous. (2017). “The making of a smart city: best practices across Europe Empowering Smart Solutions for Better Cities.” https://smart-cities-marketplace.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2021-04/the_making_of_a_smart_city_-_best_practices_across_europe.pdf.

Romualdo-Suzuki, Larissa, and Anthony Finkelstein. (2020). “Data as Infrastructure for Smart Cities: Linking Data Platforms to Business Strategies” New York: Cornell University, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2005/2005.11414.pdf.

Roth, Anders, Jenny von Bahr, Henrik Kloo, and Tomas Wisell. (2021). “Zero-emission vehicles and zones in Nordic cities-Promotion, instruments and effects.” DiVA Portal, https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1549443/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

Saunders, Tom, and Peter Baeck. (2015). “Rethinking smart cities from the ground up.” Nesta, https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/rethinking_smart_cities_from_the_ground_up_2015.pdf

Shukla, Pallavi. (2015). “Smart Cities in India: A Report,” The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), http://terienvis.nic.in/WriteReadData/links/Smart%20Cities%20in%20India_Report_pagewise-5937837909069130880.pdf

The CSR Journal. (2022, May 18). “Top Five Smart Cities Promoting Global Sustainability,” The CSR Journal, https://thecsrjournal.in/smart-cities-promoting-global-sustainability/.

Toppeta, Donato. (2010). “The Smart City Vision: How Innovation and ICT Can Build Smart, ‘Livable’, Sustainable Cities,” The Innovation Knowledge Foundation. http://www.thinkinnovation.org/file/research/23/en/Top peta_Report_005_2010.pdf

Van der Veen, Emma. (2016, May 16). “Transform,” Amsterdam Smart City, https://amsterdamsmartcity.com/updates/project/transform.

Wolfram, Marc, Sara Borgström, and Megan Farrelly. (2019). “Urban Transformative Capacity: From Concept to Practice,” Ambio, Vol 48, No 5, pp 437-448. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s13280-019-01169-y.pdf

World Economic Forum. (2015, October 25). “Can we build cities that anticipate the future?” World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/can-we-build-cities-that-anticipate-the-future.