Author
Listed:
- Weibo ZHOU
(Daugavpils University, Daugavpils, Latvia)
- Valters KAZE
(RISEBA University of Applied Sciences, Riga, Latvia)
- Anatolijs KRIVINS
(Daugavpils University, Daugavpils, Latvia)
Abstract
With the continuous aggregation of the global urban population and economic activities, the impact of digital technology on public governance has shifted from the tool level to the cognitive and logical levels. In this context, this study explores the evolution path and performance differences of urban digital twin (UDT) as a highly concentrated governance metaphor in different institutional environments. Objective: This article aims to explain the transnational differences between China and the EU in urban digital twin governance through the analytical perspective embedded in the system. The article examines how different institutional logics shape the allocation of the public sector's dynamic capabilities and explores the resulting trade-off between governance efficiency and legitimacy, particularly to provide strategic guidance for transition economies. Method: This study adopts the "Most Different Systems Design" (MDSD) method to compare and analyse the governance prototypes of China and the European Union. This study combines the institutional logic perspective (ILP) with the dynamic capabilities framework (DCF) to code policy texts and urban cases (for example, "city brain" and "citizen twins") to describe how system logic is transformed into the operational ability of "Sensing, Seizing, and Transforming". Results: This study found a structural "efficiency-legitimacy paradox": (1) The Chinese model, characterised by state-led vertical integration, minimises internal coordination costs and performs well in rapid closed-loop implementation ("output efficiency"), but faces challenges in accountability and diversity of innovative ecosystems. (2) The EU model, driven by rights protection and interoperability (for example, a multi-party information management system), ensures stronger "input legitimacy" and institutional resilience, but due to complex multi-stakeholder negotiations, it faces higher coordination friction and results in a slower diffusion rate. Conclusion: The governance performance of urban digital twin (UDT) depends not only on technical maturity, but also on institutional logic and the adaptability of organisational structure. The study shows that transition economies should avoid simply copying extreme models. On the contrary, they should build a hybrid governance architecture, dynamic balance between development pressure and rights constraints, and maintain a dynamic equilibrium between efficiency and legitimacy through hierarchical governance and interoperability mechanisms
Suggested Citation
Weibo ZHOU & Valters KAZE & Anatolijs KRIVINS, 2026.
"Urban digital twin governance: the efficiency-legitimacy trade-off,"
Access Journal, Access Press Publishing House, vol. 7(2), pages 295-311, March.
Handle:
RePEc:aip:access:v:7:y:2026:i:2:p:295-311
DOI: 10.46656/access.2026.7.2(3)
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
- O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
- Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
- H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration
- L26 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Entrepreneurship
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aip:access:v:7:y:2026:i:2:p:295-311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mariana Petrova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://access-bg.org/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.