IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i12p5485-d1678869.html

Smart Technologies for Resilient and Sustainable Cities: Comparing Tier 1 and Tier 2 Approaches in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Shabnam Varzeshi

    (School of Architecture & Urban Design, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia)

  • John Fien

    (School of Architecture & Urban Design, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia)

  • Leila Irajifar

    (School of Architecture & Urban Design, RMIT University, Melbourne 3000, Australia)

Abstract

Smart city research often emphasises technology while neglecting how governance structures and resources influence outcomes. This study compares Tier 1 (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide) and Tier 2 (Geelong, Newcastle, Hobart, Sunshine Coast) Australian cities to evaluate how urban scale, economic capacity, governance complexity, and local priorities influence smart-enabled resilience. We analysed 22 official strategy documents using a two-phase qualitative approach: profiling each city and then synthesising patterns across technological integration, community engagement, resilience objectives and funding models. Tier 1 cities leverage extensive revenues and sophisticated infrastructure to implement ambitious initiatives such as digital twins and AI-driven services, but they encounter multi-agency delays and may overlook neighbourhood needs. Tier 2 cities deploy agile, low-cost solutions—sensor-based lighting and free public Wi-Fi—that deliver swift benefits but struggle to scale without sustained support. Across the eight cases, we identified four governance archetypes and six recurring implementation barriers—data silos, funding discontinuity, skills shortages, privacy concerns, evaluation gaps, and policy changes—which collectively influence smart-enabled resilience. The results indicate that aligning smart technologies with governance tiers, fiscal capacity, and demographic contexts is essential for achieving equitable and sustainable outcomes. We recommend tier-specific funding, mandatory co-design, and intergovernmental knowledge exchange to enable smaller cities to function as innovation labs while directing metropolitan centres towards inclusive, system-wide transformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Shabnam Varzeshi & John Fien & Leila Irajifar, 2025. "Smart Technologies for Resilient and Sustainable Cities: Comparing Tier 1 and Tier 2 Approaches in Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-25, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5485-:d:1678869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5485/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5485/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robyn Dowling & Pauline McGuirk & Sophia Maalsen & Jathan Sadowski, 2021. "How smart cities are made: A priori, ad hoc and post hoc drivers of smart city implementation in Sydney, Australia," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(16), pages 3299-3315, December.
    2. Juhyun Lee & Julia Babcock & Thai Son Pham & Thu Hien Bui & Myounggu Kang, 2023. "Smart city as a social transition towards inclusive development through technology: a tale of four smart cities," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(S1), pages 75-100, January.
    3. Vito Albino & Umberto Berardi & Rosa Maria Dangelico, 2015. "Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 3-21, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fernando Almeida, 2023. "Prospects of Cybersecurity in Smart Cities," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Ryan Burns & Preston Welker, 2023. "Interstitiality in the smart city: More than top-down and bottom-up smartness," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(2), pages 308-324, February.
    3. Roblek Vasja & Meško Maja & Podbregar Iztok, 2021. "Mapping of the Emergence of Society 5.0: A Bibliometric Analysis," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 54(4), pages 293-305, December.
    4. Becker, Jörg & Distel, Bettina & Grundmann, Matthias & Hupperich, Thomas & Kersting, Norbert & Löschel, Andreas & Parreira do Amaral, Marcelo & Scholta, Hendrik, 2021. "Challenges and potentials of digitalisation for small and mid-sized towns: Proposition of a transdisciplinary research agenda," ERCIS Working Papers 36, University of Münster, European Research Center for Information Systems (ERCIS).
    5. Mariusz J. Ligarski & Tomasz Owczarek, 2024. "Preparing Quality of Life Surveys Versus Using Information for Sustainable Development: The Example of Polish Cities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 765-782, July.
    6. Yamilé Pérez Guilarte & Daniel Barreiro Quintáns, 2019. "Using Big Data to Measure Tourist Sustainability: Myth or Reality?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Ting Mei & Hui Liu & Bingrui Tong & Chaozhen Tong & Junjie Zhu & Yuxuan Wang & Mengyao Kou, 2025. "Exploring Knowledge Domain of Intelligent Safety and Security Studies by Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-26, February.
    8. Muhammad Atiq Ur Rehman Tariq & Alavaiola Faumatu & Maha Hussein & Muhammad Laiq Ur Rahman Shahid & Nitin Muttil, 2020. "Smart City-Ranking of Major Australian Cities to Achieve a Smarter Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    9. Yi-Ming Guo & Zhen-Ling Huang & Ji Guo & Hua Li & Xing-Rong Guo & Mpeoane Judith Nkeli, 2019. "Bibliometric Analysis on Smart Cities Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-18, June.
    10. Sabina Baraniewicz-Kotasińska, 2022. "The Scandinavian Third Way as a Proposal for Sustainable Smart City Development—A Case Study of Aarhus City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-24, March.
    11. Paulina Jaczewska & Hubert Sybilski & Marlena Tywonek, 2025. "Assessment of the Solar Potential of Buildings Based on Photogrammetric Data," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-35, February.
    12. Kisała Magdalena, 2021. "The Polish Experience in the Development of Smart Cities," TalTech Journal of European Studies, Sciendo, vol. 11(2), pages 48-64, September.
    13. Anthea van der Hoogen & Ifeoluwapo Fashoro & Andre P. Calitz & Lamla Luke, 2024. "A Digital Transformation Framework for Smart Municipalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-28, February.
    14. Marchesani, Filippo & Ceci, Giuseppe, 2026. "Taming the white elephant: How smart cities leverage mega events for advancing digital technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    15. Eleftheria KOLOKYTHA & Georgios KOLOKYTHAS & Stavros VALSAMIDIS & Giannoula FLOROU, 2015. "The Contribution Of The Open Data To The Development Of The Smart Cities," Scientific Bulletin - Economic Sciences, University of Pitesti, vol. 14(2), pages 3-16.
    16. Pasquale Del Vecchio & Gioconda Mele & Valentina Ndou & Giustina Secundo, 2018. "Open Innovation and Social Big Data for Sustainability: Evidence from the Tourism Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, September.
    17. Ali M. Alqahtany, 2025. "Smart Cities as a Pathway to Sustainable Urbanism in the Arab World: A Case Analysis of Saudi Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-16, February.
    18. Łukasz Brzeziński & Magdalena Krystyna Wyrwicka, 2022. "Fundamental Directions of the Development of the Smart Cities Concept and Solutions in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-52, November.
    19. Erik Karger & Marvin Jagals & Frederik Ahlemann, 2021. "Blockchain for Smart Mobility—Literature Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-32, November.
    20. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5485-:d:1678869. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.