An aggregating approach to ranking cities for knowledge-based development

Purpose: This study aims to examine the relationships between the culture dimensions defined by Hofstede and the adoption of smart city solutions based on a city’s position in the global smart cities ranking (the IESE Cities in Motion Index 2024). Design/methodology/approach: Multiple regressions were used to identify the relationship between the independent variables (value of culture dimensions defined by Hofstede: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation) and the dependent variable-value of the IESE Cities in Motion Index 2024. The IESE Cities in Motion Index was chosen for its temporal and thematic relevance, as it reflects the current results of several indicators that are priority indicators of the technological and social development of the city. Smart cities were selected based on their rankings in the IESE Cities in Motion Index 2024. Forty-four cities with the highest ranking (high-H and relatively high-RH) were included in the analysis. Findings: This study has shown that higher values of long-term orientation and individualism and a low level of uncertainty avoidance have a positive impact on the adoption of smart city solutions. On the other hand, the proposed relationship between power distance and adoption of smart city solutions as well as masculinity and adoption of smart city solutions was not confirmed and requires further research. The proposed relationships between some national culture dimensions and the adoption of smart city solutions hold true for cities considered in the IESE Cities in Motion Index 2024. Research limitations/implications: The main limitation is a relatively low number of cities taken into analysis. Another limitation is the lack of a comprehensive and complete measure that would take into account all of the various phases of the smart city management process. Regardless of these limitations, the study has achieved a part of its main research goal in proving that the proposed relationships between some national culture dimensions and the adoption of smart city solutions hold true for cities considered in the IESE Cities in Motion Index 2024. On the other hand, the study has also opened some new questions regarding the relationship between masculinity and power distance and their influence on the adoption of smart city solutions that require further research. Originality/value: The literature does not pay much attention to the cultural determinants of smart city management in the form of organisational and managerial solutions during the transition from a classic city to a smart city; therefore, the paper tries to explore the role of cultural factors in city management and urban development. The motivation for this study is to identify the relationship between Hofstede culture dimensions and the level of smart city solutions adaptation and their influence on a city’s position in the global smart cities ranking.

Governments and companies across the globe are promoting smart cities, and their developments usually reflect both globally shared ideas and locally specific agendas and implementations. This paper examines the smart cities of Singapore and Seoul – two key global cities in Asia with legacies of state-led developmentalism. It discusses the two cities’ latest smart city endeavors, trajectories, and policy motivations. In particular, it explores the role of smart city policy in governments’ local and global agendas for development and argues that the two acclaimed cases can be interpreted as globally-oriented neo-developmentalist smart cities. In doing so, this paper also explains that the typically assumed developmentalist feature becomes much more complicated as it intermixes with the global cities’ international outlooks and aspirations as well as the changing demands from citizens in the post-developmental era. Highlights I examine the two ‘actually-existing’ global smart cities in Asia. I explore the role of smart city policy in local and global agendas for development. Singapore and Seoul reflect globally-oriented neo-developmentalist smart cities. Singapore and Seoul are not hardware-driven developmentalist smart cities.

Many nations of the world are responding to the shift from development policies that rely on intensified labor and capital into alternative policies that build on the intensification of knowledge. The trend towards knowledge-based development has received increasing attention from academics and policy makers in the world. Innovative development paradigms of existing urban models (cities of knowledge, creative cities, and local circles of the knowledge society [precincts]) have opened up alternative prospects for development to the nations of the world. The Emirate of Dubai was among the Arab countries that absorbed this lesson and took the initiative of transforming its economy into a knowledge economy, building their development policies on the intensification of knowledge, embarked on the creation of the creative city and the formation of a knowledge capital, and stopping to understand this experience and explain its constraints; perhaps the research findings would support this effort.

Clean, green, creative, and now smart cities have all been separately identified, measured, ranked, and evaluated. Are they really all just different ways of talking about the same things? Cities that rank well in one category always seem to do well on the others. This research identifies and compares creative, green, and smart cities and looks for correlations. This research will proceed along two lines. First, new measures for identifying smart cities and sustainable cities are developed. These are then combined with existing measures for green and creative cities. Which cities are creative but not smart? Green but not creative? Second, what are the relationships among cities for being creative, green, and smart? This research will help cities, regions, and policy makers, many of whom are pursuing growth strategies based around one or more of these concepts. By discussing the relationships among these strategies, a more nuanced approach may be developed.

A tripla revolução informática, telemática e rizomática que marca a emergência da sociedade em rede, da economia da informação e da globalização do conhecimento é a fronteira mais avançada e intangível da transformação urbana contemporânea. O desafio é en

The article summarizes the study of the phenomenon of the creative city as a factor of digital society development in that it aims to solve the problems of the city as a complex social, economic, cultural phenomenon of XXI century digital era. The solution of the problems of the "creative city", which should be implemented in its practice, innovation, creativity, intelligence, which are fundamental for the use of digital technologies, is revealed. They are the condition for the implementation of a set of innovations in the digital society. The aim of the article is to conceptualize the creative city as a factor of the development of a digital society that develops in the context of such categories as "smart city", innovation, creativity, cultural planning. The research methodology is analyzed, which includes Agile-methodology as a theoretical basis of the digital society, which allows to reconsider radically the mission, functions, legitimacy, tools of activity in the creative city. The combination of synergetic, systemic and axiological methods and approaches allows to explain the peculiarities of the development of the creative city in order to increase the efficiency of digitalization of society. The social and axiological method revealed the values of the digital society, which is based on the cultural planning of the city, the cultural functions of man and the state. At the heart of the cultural sphere management of the creative city - the development of cultural organizations, which involves the use of cultural knowledge, insider processes, the use of cultural potential of the individual, which can change the development of the organization and the city. The combination of creativity and innovation, which contribute to the transformation of a creative city into a smart city based on digitalization, is revealed. The directions of development of digital technologies of the creative and smart city are considered and the management of the creative city in the context of development of cultural resources is analyzed. Therefore, the functions of digitalization should be developed to constantly support this creative ecology of the city. The opportunity to use effectively the resources of the city and its cultural resources using digital technologies will contribute to the formation of a digital city. The scientific novelty of the study in the analysis of a new problem, which has not yet been analyzed in the domestic social and philosophical literature and is of great practical importance for modern Ukrainian society. The practical significance of the theme of the creative city as a factor in the development of digital society is that it is studied in the context of cultural management.

Migrant knowledge workers: An empirical study of global Sydney as a knowledge city

Cutting through the clutter of smart city definitions: A reading into the smart city perceptions in India

“Smart city” is a new model of territorial development, taking into account the growing importance of information, innovation and human capital. One of the main elements of the “smart city” is a developed system of higher education. The aim of this work was to study the impact of higher education on "smart" and innovative cities. The objectives of this work were to obtain quantitative characteristics of the impact of the University on the smart city. Approach to solving this problem was to build indicators based on indicators that characterize the quality of life, and ratings to compare cities on their basis. The hypothesis of the study is that the higher education system has a positive impact on the development of smart and innovative cities. A theoretically justified method of constructing an indicator of a certain direction of socio-economic development is a component analysis of indicators characterizing this direction. As a result, the rankings of Russian and foreign cities based on the characteristics of quality of life, which prove that education is a key indicator of the development of "smart" and innovative cities.

A critical reflection on the purposes, role and performance of city rankings through an holistic communicational approach is at the core of this article. Grounded on a conceptual framework that highlights the contemporary idea of the city—beyond the smart city and more as a co-intelligent, collaborative and co-creative entity, and on the performance outputs of city rankings as territorial and strategic communication tools that actually represent the state of cities, we address the citizens’ presence or contribute—as main city stakeholders—to city rankings. In order to make research tangible with a practical component, an exploratory comparative content analysis of three recognized city rankings: the CBI – City Brands Index 2017, the GCR – 2018 Global Cities Report, and the Global Liveability Index 2018—was carried out.

Smart cities are transforming urban landscapes worldwide, integrating digital technologies to enhance efficiency, sustainability, and quality of life. Despite Japans global leadership in technology and innovation, the country struggles to keep pace with international smart city developments, ranking lower than global leaders. This study investigates the institutional, technological, and socio-cultural challenges that hinder Japans smart city transformation. This research delineates the fundamental barriers hindering Japan's optimal utilization of digital technologies in urban development, as revealed through an examination of policy documents, global smart city rankings, and governmental initiatives. The findings suggest that while Japan possesses advanced technological capabilities, governance inefficiencies, regulatory complexities, and socio-economic disparities continue to impede its smart city progress. The research culminates by offering suggestions aimed at enhancing policy alignment, fostering public confidence in digital governance, and expediting the incorporation of intelligent technologies into urban service delivery. Addressing these interconnected challenges through an integrated and inclusive approach will be essential for Japan to maximize the benefits of smart city innovations and achieve long-term sustainability in urban development.

In the process of turning the post-industrial city of Malmö, Sweden, into a knowledge-based, creative city, new urban planning strategies and visions are being developed. An important component of developing the “knowledge city” is the spatial conceptualization for renewal of urban life. One such concept introduced in Malmö is “the 4th urban environment” (det 4.e stadsrummet). In this article, based on critical urban studies, the development, branding, and practice of the 4th urban environment as a strategy to generate a creative economy and knowledge city is critically analyzed as part of a neoliberal planning discourse. The article raises the question, what kind of vision is “the 4th urban environment”? What is it an expression of; what does it mean for planning practice and to urban development? Contextualizing and investigating trends of neoliberal planning ideas are important to an understanding of the social and economic consequences of unequal power relations. The 4th urban environment and its application in Malmö is illustrative of existing neoliberal planning practices in a Nordic context, and in other similar economies with legacies of redistribution policies and long-standing leadership of the Social Democratic Party. This article focuses on what is articulated within discourses that re-present particular notions of space and place, to gain a better understanding of what neoliberal planning does to space.

Cities are an inexhaustible source of creativity, not only due to agglomeration and density but also because of the interaction between actors, the possibilities to generate ideas, and the talent and diversity they attract. Cities and their administrative bodies often see the supply and demand for vibrant, livable spaces —with access to services, public space, and cultural goods and services— are often seen as secondary and luxurious objectives, as opposed to seeing them as an essential driver for economic development, the attraction, and retention of talent, nor as a source of community cohesion, adaptation of the infrastructure and transformation of the public space and placemaking.
\nThis doctoral thesis seeks to understand the variables related to the creative economy that the most prosperous regions and cities globally have promoted to facilitate the creation of wealth and job creation. Curiously, the creative economy has often also been an effective solution for sustainability manage, maintain, and disseminate tangible and intangible cultural heritage. This dissertation also seeks to understand basic notions between possible gaps in emerging creative ecosystems and their supply of cultural infrastructure. It analyzes the emergence of the concept of the Orange Economy in Latin America and its possible projection in the public policy narrative. This analysis starts from the perspective of urban planning, focusing on cases at a local level, and is preceded by the macro vision from some multilateral development organizations. To achieve this goal, our research will rely on the analysis of synthetic indexes and tools to compare creative and livable regions and cities, in addition to deepening the analysis of three intervention methodologies designed by multilateral organizations, through text analysis. Finally, the dissertation, based on specific case studies, delves into the characterization of best practices regarding the use of urban planning tools to promote creative cities in the US — Washington, DC (the most competitive city for artists in the USA), Baltimore, and Seattle — and in future impacts — positive and negative — of the location of creative economy technology companies, such as Amazon, in the surrounding communities of Arlington and Alexandria, in the Washington, DC metropolitan area, understanding the first effects of influence, as well as also possible externalities such as displacement and disparities in access to cultural goods and services.
\nTools such as the "creative cities" composite indexes and rankings of livable cities can help detect deficiencies or possibilities for expansion and should open debates and support positive narratives. However, these tools should not be considered as an absolute value or definitive guarantee of the economic and social maximization of culture and creativity as a competitive advantage. This research also argues that it will be imperative to foster the potential of their creative economy, innovation, and culture to maximize the competitive advantages of cities without neglecting the celebration and preservation of the essence that makes cities unique: the communities that configure them and its cultural fabric, without diluting its identity, nor decapitalizing its intangible cultural heritage; much less expelling its most vulnerable citizens. Creative cities are those in which culture and diversity are breathed but cannot be those urban concentrations with prohibitive prices for citizens that, ultimately, shape their particular and unique characteristics —what we call material and intangible cultural heritage.

Concepts like ‘creative city’, ‘world city’ and ‘eco city’ arrive with loud celebration, but fade in just a few years. In recent years, ‘smart city’ has been a buzzword. As each fad emerges, urbanists debate its meaning and implications. However, why so many urban concepts circulate at all is rarely focused on. This study attempts to answer this question based on the Marxian view of the built environment as a fixed capital. We focus on the differences between the built environment and other types of fixed capital, and show how these differences render capital circulation in the built environment sector more fragile. We claim that such fragility cannot be fixed within the circuit of capital, so external intervention is necessary and deployment of catchy urban concepts is a resorted method of such intervention.

Digitalization today is a modern trend focused on streamlining processes and improving efficiency. The introduction of information and communication technologies has affected not only enterprises, but complex socio-economic systems as cities, and this predetermined the development of smart cities. Today, IBM, McKinsey or Price Waterhouse are considered the brain centers for the development of this concept, while Siemens, BMW, Mercedes Benz, IBM, Phillips, General Electric, etc., discovered the “smart” city as a future-oriented concept, and chose only that a niche in which they can offer their products and services. The development of smart cities is also influenced by intergovernmental organizations and their specialized departments, as well as research centers, institutes and laboratories. There are more than 100 cities in the world that claim the title of “smart city”. At the same time, their current ratings reflect the implementation of modern information and communication technologies in the life of a person with the aim of improving the quality of his life in the development of the urban environment. The IESE Cities in Motion Index, Global Power City Index, The Global Cities Index, The Global Cities Outlook, Juniper Research, EasyPark Smart City Index ratings provide sufficient and comprehensive indicators to give this title. The developed standards ISO 37120 and ISO 37122 determine the main indicators for smart cities, while the criteria that determine the achievement of city smartness are conditionally formed today, which allows to clarify the semantic loads implemented in this definition, namely, to prioritize technologies for people and society, improving quality of life, and highlight differences with other similar definitions.