A Comprehensive Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Smart City Interventions: Evidence from Espoo Transformation Process

Abstract

In recent years, the world’s population living in cities has been rapidly increasing. Cities are transforming their infrastructure in a smarter and more efficient way so that sustainable development forms part of their long-term strategy. However, this transformation does not always result in expected benefits due to a variety of factors such as an absence of social acceptance, a lack of holistic design and the development of unilateral interventions. An analysis of the scientific literature related to the evaluation of the impact of smart city actions revealed a gap in the holistic methods for their assessment. To this end, an accurate evaluation of implemented smart solutions focusing on the energy domain is necessary in order to assess the expected and realized impact of each solution. This paper proposes a seven-step methodology for assessing the impact of smart city interventions and presents a use case for the city of Espoo. A number of major findings were the outcome of our research and development work, such as the need for a thorough analysis of the long-term vision of the city, a combined top-down and bottom-up approach and the ongoing cooperation between all stakeholders involved in urban planning and transformation, in which necessary Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are defined.

The Transition of Cities towards Innovations in Mobility: Searching for a Global Perspective

“…Additionally, while INF is required for the adoption of mobility innovations, it does not seem to play the key role that has been outlined previously. Cities are transforming their infrastructure towards achieving a smarter and more efficient approach to sustainable development [ 1 ]. The pressure from the dominant automobile system on infrastructure—worsening urban congestion, increasing travel times and accidents—leads to pressure for the renewal of mobility systems, although these do not rest exclusively on the said infrastructure [ 20 , 36 ].…”

“…Infrastructure provides a solution to the problems arising from massive urbanization [ 21 , 31 ] and ultimately determines the health of cities [ 22 ]. The reinforcement of infrastructure is essential to determining the level of readiness for smart city transformation [ 1 , 27 , 31 , 44 , 49 , 50 ]. The attractiveness of a city is linked to its ability to attract a creative population [ 51 ], a construct that encompasses a broad spectrum of elements [ 52 ].…”

“…Urban transition involves the creation, replacement and standardization of urban regimes and practices [ 27 , 43 ]. Therefore, the smart city involves complex transformational processes stemming from profound modifications around the hard—infrastructure and resources—and soft—human and social capital, knowledge, social innovation, etc.—components of existing urban regimes [ 1 , 3 , 27 ]. The MLP shows that changing to other forms of mobility is a challenge that not only responds to individual decisions, but also to changing the structures of the socio-technical regime [ 13 , 36 ].…”

“…A global increase in the population living in cities has taken place, leading to projections such as 70% living in major urban centers by 2050 [ 1 ]. This is a process linked to infrastructures and lifestyles, and that entails externalities for the environment and society with implications for the health of its citizens [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ].…”

“…The smart city is the result of a transformation process followed by many cities around the world aiming to increase their efficiency, facilitate the participation of their citizens, and reduce the environmental impact of their activities [ 1 ]. Although it is an ambitious concept, and many countries prioritize smart cities as a way to strengthen their sustainability strategies [ 25 ], it is difficult to identify shared definitions and guidelines across countries with different contexts because the development of smart city projects is tailored to each city [ 4 , 6 , 21 ].…”