Smart campus is an emerging concept enabled by digital transformation opportunities in higher education. Smart campuses are often perceived as miniature replicas of smart cities and serve as living labs for smart technology research, development, and adoption, along with their traditional teaching, learning and research functions. There is currently a limited understanding of how the smart campus is conceptualized and practiced. This paper addresses this gap by using a systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach. The study uses four major domains of the smart campus, i.e., society, economy, environment, and governance, to classify existing research. These domains are each aligned to the central smart campus concepts of digital technology and big data. The analysis found little evidence of a comprehensive real-world application of the smart campus towards addressing all four domains. This highlights the infancy of the current conceptualization and practice. The findings contribute to the development of a new conceptual foundation and research directions for the smart campus notion and informs its practice through a conceptual framework. The findings reported in this paper offer a firm basis for comprehensive smart campus conceptualization, and also provide directions for future research and development of smart campuses.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Evaluations of plan implementation are typically conceived in terms of plan conformance (the degree to which outcomes align with planning intent) or plan performance (the degree to which decision makers apply the plan). In this research, we consider the relationship between performance–conformance by evaluating the implementation of compact activity centre policy in greater Brisbane. We examine two decades of changes to local land use planning regulations using content analysis, quantifications of permitted development intensity, and comparisons of actual land use changes with planned intent, to identify evidence of the use of metropolitan scale activity centre policy. We find that the activity centre policy performed well and was used as intended across the metropolitan area. However, despite strong performance, the policy conformed poorly in terms of achieving the expected outcomes. These findings highlight the importance of understanding plan implementation from both performance and conformance perspectives. While conformance evaluations are essential to connect planning intent to physical outcomes, understanding plan performance is also necessary to explain the results of conformance evaluations and whether conformance successes or failures were due to deficiencies with the plan itself or how the plan was used by key actors charged with its implementation.

No abstract