IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rjusxx/v27y2023is1p50-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What do people want in a smart city? Exploring the stakeholders’ opinions, priorities and perceived barriers in a medium-sized city in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Del-Real
  • Chandra Ward
  • Mina Sartipi

Abstract

Many cities in the United States are pursuing agendas to implement ICT-based solutions to tackle urban challenges, thus achieving the ‘smart city’ label. While the discussion on this urban development paradigm has revolved around the intensive use of technologies, the academic literature increasingly calls for shifting the focus to the people living in the cities. This paper argues that to achieve a people-centred smart city, cities should include the perspectives of all the local stakeholders. Under this assumption, this paper provides the views of the local stakeholders in a medium-sized city in Tennessee, Chattanooga. Particularly, this study explores their perceived smart city concept, the ethical standards that should guide smart city projects, the desired future projects in their community, and the barriers to implementing them. The data was collected using a combination of participatory budgeting, five focus groups, and twenty-eight interviews with city dwellers, entrepreneurs, university faculty, non-profit members, and government officials. The results suggest that, far from the image of a highly technological city, the stakeholders envision a city dedicated to improving the quality of life and environmental sustainability. Furthermore, to achieve this smart city, the projects need to be based on full transparency and the promotion of social inclusion. In contrast to the dominant trend towards the privatization of urban space, this study finds that the stakeholders prefer public based smart city projects such as ICT-based public transport services. However, its successful implementation will have to overcome the barriers caused by funding constraints, public acceptance, and political interests. Cities may use the results of this study to design more responsible smart city projects that strike an optimal point between citizen engagement and technological applications and innovations while supporting all stakeholders’ needs.HighlightsStakeholders’ opinions on smart city projects in Chattanooga were examinedChattanooga can be considered an example of a medium-sized smart cityPublic-based, transparent and socially inclusive projects are preferredPreferences on smart city projects varied across groups of stakeholdersIncluding all city stakeholders’ visions can reduce social cleavages

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Del-Real & Chandra Ward & Mina Sartipi, 2023. "What do people want in a smart city? Exploring the stakeholders’ opinions, priorities and perceived barriers in a medium-sized city in the United States," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(S1), pages 50-74, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rjusxx:v:27:y:2023:i:s1:p:50-74
    DOI: 10.1080/12265934.2021.1968939
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/12265934.2021.1968939
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/12265934.2021.1968939?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ibrahim Mutambik, 2023. "The Global Whitewashing of Smart Cities: Citizens’ Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-16, May.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rjusxx:v:27:y:2023:i:s1:p:50-74. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rjus20 .

    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.