- Slides: 18
Smart Policies for Smart Cities: How Institutional Arrangements Matter Don Rodney Ong Junio Kyoto University
Outline • Background • Why Smart Cities? • What is a smart city? • Research Question • Framework • Findings
Background • 54% of the world’s population lived in urban areas in 2014 and by 2045, the total number of urban residents will reach 6 billion, 2 billion more than current estimates. (World Bank) • Urbanization is a common feature of the development narrative of countries in Asia Pacific. • Cities are important as most economic activities are generated in these areas.
Why Smart Cities? • In recent years, a “smart city” approach has become the latest policy response to the challenge of rapid urbanization. • In India for example, the government has announced a USD 1. 2 billion commitment to develop 100 “smart cities” to accommodate the expected 843 million people living in Indian cities by 2050. • The smart city approach recasts many of the traditional issues associated with urban living.
What is a smart city? • Defined as a “knowledge”, “cyber” or “eco” city. • A city “connecting the physical infrastructure, the IT infrastructure, the social infrastructure, and the business infrastructure to leverage the collective intelligence of the city” (Harrison et al, 2010). • A smart city uses information and communications technology (ICT) to enhance its livability, workability and sustainability. In simplest terms, there are three parts to that job: collecting, communicating and “crunching. ” (Smart Cities Council)
What is a smart city? • A common theme present in most definition of smart city is the importance of leveraging on ICTs to bind the various aspects of city living especially in the social, and economic spheres. • Definitional impreciseness of smart city contributes to the often loose use of the term. • Smart city as an urban labelling phenomenon (Hollands, 2008). • In this sense, the term smart city is used for place marketing purposes only more than anything else.
Research Question • This paper raises the following conceptual queries: • What policies enable smart cities? • How are formal institutions configured to drive smart city development? • Institutional factors are often overlooked • When institutional factors are considered, they mostly relate to formal institutions such as policies Nam and Pardo (2011)
Framework • Smart cities can be understood as a system • Institutional economics as guiding framework • Analytical lens • Formal institutions • Such as rules, laws, constitutions • Informal institutions • Such as norms of behavior, conventions, self-imposed codes of conduct • Enforcement characteristics of formal and informal institutions • Case Study • Singapore • Seoul, South Korea
Why Singapore and Seoul • Pioneers in smart city development in Asia Pacific • Relative success and maturity in creating a thriving smart city ecosystem • Strong reputation as highly competitive cities occupying the top list of rankings such as the World City Competitiveness Index; Liveability Ranking; Quality of Living Rankings etc. • Similar in their institutional configuration but the paths they have taken to reach their current level of smart city development are divergent.
Seoul’s Smart City Journey: From U-Seoul to Smart Seoul 2015 • U-Seoul: aimed to improve the city’s sustainability, competitiveness and sustainability. • Emphasis of this approach is on building sufficient urban infrastructure such as sensors, broadband backbone to provide ubiquitous city services in the areas of public administration, health, etc. • Focus on traditional city infrastructure limited the potential of leveraging on ICTs to improve citizen engagement. • Smart Seoul 2015: build smart infrastructure, provide smart services, and advance smart services. • Shift from focusing on infrastructure to improving efficiency in government services.
Singapore’s Smart Nation Initiative • Singapore’s i. N 2015 (Intelligent Nation 2015) masterplan forms part of the country’s earlier drive to develop a smart nation. Building a national broadband network in addition to expanding citizen services app are some key components of i. N 2015. • Smart Nation Programme Office (launched in 2014) • Based on three dimensions, the Smart Nation programme aims to bring in more jobs to Singapore, improve the quality of life, and a general improvement in society. • A cornerstone of Singapore’s smart nation drive is leveraging on big data and cocreating citizen service apps with the public. • A broader theme that figures prominently in Singapore’s strategy but is under emphasized in Seoul’s own smart city approach is job creation and helping reorient the city to become city suitable for ICT related industries to flourish.
Government leadership and a comprehensive approach to smart city policy making • In addition to a policy framework, there is also a strong government leadership in ensuring that their smart city strategies will gain traction. • Presence of a strong public service able to implement broad policy directives and ensure that its smart city projects will be implemented is seen as a crucial factor.
Differentiated approach to smart city development • Seoul and Singapore's Smart City initiatives draw on different policy impetus and mechanisms. • Both Singapore and Seoul's smart city initiatives have more than one policy objectives- job creation, ensuring access to ICTs, improving delivery of public services, improving quality of life and the like. • Both governments have also shown various modalities to achieve their aims such as through public private partnerships, in-house development of software and apps for citizen services etc. • This varied approach highlights the existence of multiple ways to approach and to implement smart city programmes.
More than just wires and sensors • While a smart city in its early stages can be about laying down smart infrastructure, these are not sufficient condition to encourage meaningful ICT collaboration between government and citizens. • As seen in Seoul's U-Seoul project, the provision of ubiquitous technology did not result in improved quality of life for citizens and thus meet the stated objective of its smart city policies.
Encouraging demand meaningful use • Inasmuch as smart city policies are aimed at creating new ways to deliver public services, mechanisms must be in place to ensure that there will be public demand for these new services and products. • On the supply side, Seoul has been involved in providing access devices to people as a way to encourage use of its citizen services apps. • In Singapore, the government has been hosting hackathons with students and other stakeholders to encourage use of its services and creation of new services through data that they release to the public.
Smart policies for smart cities would also require a “smart” civil service and an “ICT-smart” citizenry. • Administrative efficiency and organizational capabilities of cities • Embeddedness of ICT culture